f, 

ffl 


REPORT  OF  A  STUDY 


of  the 


FINANCIAL  CONDITION  AND 

PRACTICES 


of  the 


CITY  OF  ROCHESTER,  N.  Y. 


THE  U8HARY  OF  THE 
APR  3  0  1924 


UNIVERSITY  OF  ILLINOIS 


.  PW  t 

iffly 


US fi4HY  OF  m 


UNl'fFP&i Tv  - 
.,V  *  t-’  of  (  jf  Qp 


ft !  tMn 


ROCHESTER  BUREAU  OF  MUNICIPAL  RESEARCH,  Inc. 

DECEMBER,  1923 


NOTICE:  Return  or  renew  all  Library  Materials!  The  Minimum  Fee  for 
each  Lost  Book  is  $50.00. 

The  person  charging  this  material  is  responsible  for 
its  return  to  the  library  from  which  it  was  withdrawn 
on  or  before  the  Latest  Date  stamped  below. 

Theft,  mutilation,  and  underlining  of  books  are  reasons  for  discipli¬ 
nary  action  and  may  result  in  dismissal  from  the  University. 

To  renew  call  Telephone  Center,  333-8400 

UNIVERSITY  OF  ILLINOIS  LIBRARY  AT  URBANA-CHAMPAIGN 


L161— 0-1096 


Report  of  a  Study 

of  the 

Financial  Condition  and  Practices 

of  the 


City  of  Rochester,  N.  Y. 


Submitted  to 

The  Mayor,  the  Comptroller,  the 
Corporation  Counsel, 
and  the  Members  of  the  Common  Council 


THE  LIBRARY  OF  THE 

APfU-Q-  1924 

UNIVERSITY  OF  ILLINOIS 


Rochester  Bureau  of  Muncipal  Research,  Inc. 

DECEMBER,  I923 


TABLE  OF  CONTENTS 


Page 


Summary  of  Recommendations .  4 

Introduction . v .  6 

Part  I — General  Description  of  Financial  Procedure .  7 

The  Purpose  of  the  Government . 7 

Funds . 8 

Budget  Procedure . 10 

Expenditure  Procedure . 12 

Revenue  Procedure . 14 

Assessment  of  Property  and  Tax  Levy . 14 

Delinquent  Taxes . 15 

Miscellaneous  Revenues . 18 

Assessment  Procedure . 19 

Local  Improvements . 19 

Collection  of  Assessments . 21 

Borrowing  Procedure . 22 

Borrowing  for  Current  Expense . 24 

Assessment  Fund  Borrowing . 25 

Loan  Fund  Borrowing . 25 

Redemption  of  Debt . 26 


Part  II — History  of  Financial  Transactions  for  Last  Thirteen  Years.  .  .31 


Expenditures . 31 

Revenues . 33 

Tax  Revenues . 33 

Tax  Rate  and  Tax  Limit . 34 

Miscellaneous  Revenues . 35 

Assessments . 36 

Borrowing . 37 

Debt  Limit . 38 

Redemption  of  Debt . 39 

Part  III--Financial  Condition  of  City  at  Present  Time . 41 

Growing  Expenditures . 41 

Expenditures  for  Schools . 42 

Condition  of  the  Revenues . 42 

Increasing  Assessed  Valuations . 42 

Borrowing  for  Current  Expenses . 43 

Utility  Revenues . 44 

Miscellaneous  Revenues . 44 

Condition  of  Assessments . 45 

Indebtedness  Condition . 45 

Sinking  Funds . 46 

Part  IV — Proposed  Changes  in  Policy  and  Procedure . 48 

Expenditures . 48 

Revenues . 50 

Tax  Revenues . 50 

Utility  Revenues . 51 

Miscellaneous  Revenues . 52 

Assessments . 54 

Borrowing . 55 

Immediate  Program . 55 

Bonding  Section  for  Charter . 56 

Funds . .62 

Budget . 65 

Budget  Section  in  Charter . 65 

Other  Charter  Amendments . 67 

Form  of  the  Budget . 68 


Appendix — Financial  Tables  1  to  42 


74—109 


■b^.\ 

^  SS  \\  n_ 


1 


INDEX  OF  FINANCIAL  TABLES 
Title  of  Table  Table  Number 

Tax  Roll  Items .  1 

Licenses . ) .  2 

Budget  Expenditures  Analyzed  by  Organization  Units .  3 

Comparison  of  1922  Budget  Expenditures  with  1910  Expenditures..  4 

Budget  Expenditures  1910-1922  Inclusive .  5 

Comparison  of  1922  Budget  Expenditures  with  1910  Expenditures 

Classified  by  Object  of  Expenditure .  6 

Direct  Assessments  for  Current  Expenses . . .  7 

Local  Improvement  Ordinances  Certified  by  Comptroller  to  Assessors  8 

Expenditures  of  City  of  Rochester  for  Land  and  Buildings .  9 

Revenues  of  City  of  Rochester .  10 

Assessed  Valuations  of  Property .  11 

Assessed  Valuation,  Equalization  Rate  and  Estimated  True  Valua¬ 
tion  of  Property .  12 

Tax  Rate  Applicable  to  General  Municipal  Expense .  13 

Revenues  of  the  City  of  Rochester  from  Sources  Other  than  Munic¬ 
ipal  Taxation  and  Borrowing .  14 

Cost  of  Local  Improvements  Certified  in  Years  1913-1922  and 

Analysis  of  Assessment  Charges .  15 

Charges  Against  the  City  of  Rochester  on  Account  of  Local  Im¬ 
provement  Assessments,  E.  S.  T.  S.  Assessments  and  Addi¬ 
tions  to  Annual  Tax  Rolls .  16 

Summary  of  Money  Raised  by  Borrowing .  17 

Money  Raised  by  Borrowing .  18 

Summary  Statement  of  Note  Transactions  by  Years .  19 

Summary  Statement  by  Purpose  of  Note  Transactions .  20 

Summary  Statement  of  Bond  Issues  by  Years .  21 

Detail  of  Bond  Issues .  22 

Yearly  Debt  Statements .  23 

Redemption  of  Bonds  and  Notes  from  Sinking  Funds .  24 

Summary  Debt  Service  Expenditures .  25 

Expenditures  for  General  Debt  Service .  26 

Expenditures  for  Water  Debt  Service .  27 

Expenditures  for  Public  Market  Debt  Service .  28 

Bonds  Outstanding .  29 

Notes  Outstanding,  December  31,  1922 .  30 

Assets  of  Sinking  Funds  as  of  December  31,  1922 .  31 

Balances  of  Water  Sinking  Funds  as  of  December  31,  1922 .  32 

Balances  of  Special  Sinking  Funds .  33 

Balances  of  Sinking  Funds  as  of  December  31,  1922 .  34 

Estimated  Deficits  of  Special  Sinking  Funds  at  Maturity .  35 

Collections  from  Business  Taxes  (Other  Than  on  Liquor  Traffic)  and 

from  General  Licenses  and  Permits  in  Thirteen  Cities,  1919.  .  36 

List  of  Term  Bonds  in  Order  of  Maturity  Dates,  Which  Should  Be 

Carried  by  the  General  Fund .  37 

Analysis  of  Proposed  General  Debt  Service .  38 

Analysis  of  Proposed  Water  Debt  Service .  39 

Analysis  of  Future  General  Debt  Service .  40 

Summary  Budget  for  Current  Funds .  41 

Budget  Appropriations .  42 


I 


543414 


This  report  was  prepared  in  1919  for  the  Rochester  Bureau  of 
Municipal  Research,  Inc.,  by  Clarence  C.  Ludwig.  Revision  of  certain 
portions  and  addition  of  material  to  bring  the  report  to  date  December 
31,  1922,  were  made  by  Clarence  E.  Higgins.  The  Trustees  of  the 
Bureau  submit  the  report  to  the  City  Administration  with  the  following 
recommendations : 

THE  CITY  SHOULD 

Page 


Expenditures  reference 

1  Standardize  positions  and  employment  policy  before  raising 

salaries .  49 

2  Revise  procedure  for  purchasing  materials  and  supplies.  ...  49 

3  Increase  expenditures  for  debt  service  so  as  to  make  bond 

redemption  adequate .  48 

Revenues 

4  Equalize  real  estate  assessments  and  revise  assessment 

methods .  50 

5  Support  the  movement  to  exempt  educational  costs  from 

the  tax  limit .  51 

6  Make  its  utilities  self-sustaining .  51 

7  Support  the  movement  to  secure  for  the  cities  a  larger  share 

of  the  state  income  tax .  52 

8  Increase  or  impose  new  license  and  permit  fees .  52 

Assessments 

9  Take  care  of  its  debt  to  the  Local  Improvement  Fund  on 

account  of  delinquent'  assessment  charges .  54 

Borrowing 

10  Make  its  immediate  bonding  program  conform  to  suggested 

financial  standards . 55 


11  Amend  the  charter  to  limit  the  term  of  bonds  issued  for 

improvements  to  the  estimated  life  of  the  improvements  5  7 

12  Amend  the  charter  to  keep  improvements  assessed  wholly 

against  the  city  out  of  the  Local  Improvement  Fund.  .  57 

13  Amend  the  charter  to  permit  the  funding  of  the  city’s  share 


of  assessments  on  a  ten  year  basis .  57 

14  Amend  the  charter  to  require  the  Council  to  make  adequate 

provision  for  the  redemption  of  all  bonds  issued  for 
improvements . . .  57 

15  By  amendment  of  the  charter  or  by  ordinance  permit  the 

creation  of  supplementary  sinking  funds .  58 


5 


Page 

Funds  reference 

1 6  Amend  the  charter  so  the  city  can  separate  its  fund  ac¬ 

counting  from  its  proprietary  accounting. , .  62 

17  Amend  the  charter  to  include  several  general  provisions  on 

funds .  63 

18  Create  a  separate  school  fund .  63 

Budget 

19  Enforce  the  charter  provision  requiring  the  submission  of 

departmental  estimates  by  November  1 .  65 

20  Include  anticipated  current  expense  borrowing  in  the  budget 

program  and  the  appropriation  ordinance .  65 

21  Amend  the  charter  immediately  to  give  the  Council  needed 

power  and  require  it  to  control  expenditure  of  money  for 
various  purposes .  65 

22  Amend  the  charter  immediately  to  abolish  the  power  of  the 

Board  of  Estimate  and  Apportionment  to  make  sup¬ 
plemental  appropriations  out  of  excess  receipts .  66 

23  Amend  the  charter  immediately  to  make  current  fund 

surpluses  available  for  appropriation  rather  than 
transfer  to  sinking  funds .  67 

24  Amend  the  charter  to  revise  the  entire  budget  and  tax  levy 

calendar .  67 

25  Amend  the  charter  to  enlarge  the  scope  of  the  budget  so  it 


will  include  all  the  funds  of  the  city .  68 

26  Amend  the  charter  to  require  the  automatic  insertion  in  the 

budget  of  certain  fixed  charges  and  redemption  of  debt .  68 

27  Revise  the  form  of  the  appropriation  ordinance  to  get 

greater  itemization .  72 

28  Include  more  statements  in  the  budget  data  submitted  to 

the  Board,  the  Council  and  the  public .  73 


6 


INTRODUCTION 


The  cost  of  government  in  Rochester,  like  the  cost  of  food  and 
clothes,  increased  rapidly  during  and  after  the  war.  Although  this 
increase  in  the  cost  of  government  has  been  neither  so  sharp  nor  so  sudden 
as  that  in  the  commodity  market  of  the  commercial  world,  it  is  to  be 
attributed,  in  part  at  least,  to  the  same  general  causes.  The  city  has 
had  to  pay  more  for  supplies,  for  the  use  of  money  and  for  personal  serv¬ 
ice.  In  addition  to  the  inflation  of  prices,  another  element  enters  into 
the  problem  of  cost  as  it  affects  the  city.  The  scope  of  government  is 
being  constantly  and  necessarily  enlarged;  the  various  functions  which 
are  being  administered  by  the  people’s  municipal  agency  are  growing 
in  number  and  comprehensiveness.  This  trend  towards  expansion  and 
multiplication  of  function  is  in  line  with  the  development  of  “state” 
activity  the  country  over  and  it  is  neither  possible  nor  desirable  to  retard 
it.  This  is  the  basic  element  of  the  problem  of  municipal  government 
and  it  promises  that  governmental  costs  will  not  come  down  sympathet¬ 
ically  with  deflation  in  the  commodity  and  money  markets.  Moreover, 
the  “efficiency  movement”  in  government,  while  it  may  reduce  extrava¬ 
gance  in  expenditures,  will  not  in  the  long  run  reduce  the  aggregate  cost 
because  efficiency  must  always  be  tested  by  unit  cost  of  service  and  not 
by  total  cost. 

How  to  finance  the  increasing  cost  of  government  is,  therefore,  a 
permanent  problem.  The  difficulties  in  which  the  City  of  Rochester 
now  finds  itself  with  respect  to  finances  were  inevitable,  but  they  have 
been  accentuated  by  the  temporary  inflation  of  the  war  period.  In  a 
word,  the  difficulty  has  become  acute  at  this  time  because  the  revenues 
of  the  city,  limited  partly  by  law  and  partly  by  natural  causes,  have  not 
responded  to  the  needs  of  the  city  for  funds.  The  situation  is  critical. 
It  is  the  purpose  of  this  report  to  survey  the  situation  and  to  analyze 
some  of  the  elements  that  enter  into  it.  This  is  done  in  the  hope  that 
information  pertinent  to  the  problem  may  be  disseminated  and  that 
some  assistance  may  be  rendered  the  administration  in  solving  the 
problem. 

The  subject  matter  of  this  report  is  presented  according  to  the 
following  general  outline: — 

First,  a  general  description  of  the  financial  procedure; 

Second,  a  history  of  financial  transactions  for  the  past  thirteen  years; 

Third,  an  analysis  of  the  financial  condition  of  the  city  at  the  present 
time;  and 

Fourth,  suggestions  for  remedying  or  relieving  the  situation. 


PART  I 


GENERAL  DESCRIPTION  OF  FINANCIAL 

PROCEDURE 

The  financial  problem  of  the  city  differs  in  so  many  respects  from 
that  of  a  private  business  concern  that  it  is  thought  advisable  to  describe 
briefly  the  financial  procedure  of  Rochester.  To  appreciate  fully  the 
problem  facing  the  financial  administration  of  the  city,  it  is  necessary 
to  be  acquainted  with  the  methods  used  in  spending  money,  raising 
revenue,  borrowing  money,  passing  budgets  and  creating  funds,  all  of 
which  differ  very  considerably  from  ordinary  business  procedure. 

The  Purpose  of  the  Government 

Unlike  a  private  business  concern,  the  government  of  the  city  of 
Rochester  is  not  in  business  to  make  a  profit.  Its  main  object,  in  fact 
its  sole  excuse  for  existence,  is  to  render  certain  services  to  the  public. 
A  business  is  interested  mainly  in  its  profits;  a  city  is  interested  mainly 
in  giving  required  service  efficiently  and  at  cost.  To  a  business,  revenues 
are  the  primary  consideration  and  expenditures  the  secondary;  to  the 
government,  expenditures  are  the  primary  consideration,  while  revenues 
are  a  necessary  but  secondary  consideration.  The  financial  problem 
of  the  city,  then,  involves  mainly  the  question  of  what  expenditures 
shall  be  made  and  how  the  proposed  expenditures  shall  be  financed. 
Having  determined  what  services  shall  be  rendered,  the  city  calls  upon 
its  taxing  power  or  its  credit  as  a  borrower  to  provide  the  money. 

But  the  taxing  and  borrowing  power  of  the  city  are  not  unlimited. 
Not  being  restricted  by  the  necessity  of  producing  a  profit,  the  city 
nevertheless  finds  itself  hedged  about  by  various  legal  limitations.  Thus 
no  money  can  be  spent  or  raised  without  authorization  by  the  legislative 
body  of  the  city — the  Common  Council.  “No  appropriation  of  money 
may  be  made  except  by  ordinance  specifying  each  item,  the  amount 
thereof,  and  the  department,  beard,  bureau,  court,  office,  or  specific 
appropriation  for  which  the  appropriation  is  made.”  (Section  97-City 
Charter.)  This  general  provision  of  the  charter  is  supplemented  by 
many  specific  provisions  which  lay  down  the  procedure  for  incurring 
liabilities,  levying  taxes,  issuing  securities,  etc.  These  charter  provi¬ 
sions  embody  and  define  certain  well  recognized  principles  of  finance, 


8 


the  aim  of  which  is  to  protect  the  public  against  the  ravages  of  a  possible 
unrepresentative  or  corrupt  government.  The  city  is  restricted  in  its 
financial  transactions,  not  only  by  its  own  charter,  but  also  by  the  state 
constitution.  The  most  important  constitutional  limitations  on  city 
finance  are  the  provisions  limiting  the  taxing  power  and  the  borrowing 
power. 

Notwithstanding  many  constitutional  and  charter  limitations,  the 
officials  of  the  city  possess  a  great  deal  of  discretionary  power  in  admin¬ 
istering  its  finances.  There  is  plenty  of  room  on  the  one  hand  for  reck¬ 
less,  shortsighted,  planless  proceedings  which  disregard  every  canon  of 
sound  finance  and  on  the  other  for  careful  financial  planning  which 
comprehends  the  future  as  well  as  the  present. 

FUNDS 

A  description  of  the  financial  procedure  of  the  city  logically  begins 
with  a  discussion  of  funds.  A  “fund”  is  a  financial  device  which  em¬ 
bodies  the  various  legal  requirements,  restrictions,  and  authorizations 
for  the  receipt  and  disbursement  of  money.  To  create  a  fund  means 
to  set  aside  certain  specific  resources  for  certain  specific  purposes  or  to 
meet  certain  obligations.  A  fund  may  derive  its  name  from  the  nature 
of  its  resources  and  the  method  of  obtaining  money  therefrom  or  from  the 
purpose  for  which  it  is  set  aside.  Thus  there  are  many  kinds  of  funds 
and  there  is  no  arbitrary  way  of  classifying  or  naming  them. 

With  the  exception  of  the  trust  funds  (such  as  the  pension  funds 
and  the  cemetery  funds)  and  the  sinking  funds  (which  will  be  discussed 
later  in  connection  with  borrowing)  the  funds  of  the  city  of  Rochester 
may  be  put  into  three  main  groups:  (i)  revenue  and  expense  funds; 
(2)  assessment  funds;  (3)  loan  funds.  The  revenue  and  expense  funds 
are  current  funds  which  apply  current  revenues  to  the  current  operations 
of  the  government.  In  Rochester,  as  in  other  cities,  the  most  important 
revenue  and  expense  fund  is  the  General  Fund.  The  resources  of  this 
fund  usually  consist  of  the  estimated  tax  revenues  and  the  estimated 
miscellaneous  revenues;  the  obligations  comprise  the  appropriations 
to  the  various  departments  for  current  operation.  One  often  finds  in 
cities  and  states  various  “special  revenue  and  expense”  funds,  which 
set  aside  certain  specific  revenues  for  specific  purposes.  The  City  of 
Rochester  has  two  funds  of  this  type,  the  two  utility  funds — namely, 
the  Water  Fund  and  the  Public  Market  Fund.  The  municipally- 


9 


owned  utilities  are  supposed  to  be  self-sustaining  and  the  special  funds 
set  aside  their  revenues  for  use  only  in  operating  and  maintaining  them. 

All  of  the  so-called  “current”  expenditures  of  the  City  of  Rochester 
are  made  from  one  or  another  of  these  three  revenue  and  expense  funds. 
An  exception  to  this  statement  must  be  made  in  the  case  of  some  current 
services,  such  as  extra  street  lighting,  sidewalk  snow  plowing  and  sprink¬ 
ling,  which  are  financed  through  the  Local  Improvement  Fund.  The 
primary  purpose  of  the  latter  fund  is  to  finance  local  improvements 
(capital  outlays)  such  as  pavements,  sidewalks  and  sewers,  the  cost  of 
which  is  assessed  directly  against  the  property  owners  benefited.  The 
cost  of  the  aforementioned  current  services  is  charged  against  the  Local 
Improvement  Fund  rather  than  the  General  Fund,  because  the  burden 
is  shifted  to  the  taxpayer  by  the  direct  assessment  method  rather  than 
by  the  taxation  method. 

The  assessment  funds  of  the  city  are  the  Local  Improvement  Fund 
and  the  East  Side  Trunk  Sewer  Fund.  As  indicated  in  the  preceding 
paragraph,  the  resources  of  these  funds  consist  partly  of  authorized 
loans  pending  the  levying  of  assessments,  partly  of  reimbursable  expendi¬ 
tures,  and  partly  of  assessments  levied  and  either  collected  or  uncollected. 
With  the  exceptions  noted  they  are  applied  to  the  construction  of  capital 
improvements.  The  Local  Improvement  Fund  is  a  general  assessment 
fund  comprising  all  the  “local  improvement  ordinances”  except  the  East 
Side  Trunk  Sewer  fund.  The  procedure  for  handling  the  latter  is  specially 
laid  down  in  the  charter. 

The  resources  of  the  various  loan  funds  consist,  in  the  beginning, 
of  authorizations  to  borrow  money  to  be  used  for  capital  outlays  such 
as  the  construction  of  various  city  buildings,  the  construction  of  conduit 
lines  and  plants,  the  purchase  of  land,  etc.  Usually  there  is  a  separate 
loan  fund  created  for  each  major  improvement,  although  occasionally 
several  improvements  are  lumped  together  in  one  loan  fund  such  as  the 
recent  Municipal  Building  Construction  Fund.  The  loan  funds  that 
are  now  open  on  the  books  of  the  city  are  as  follows : 

Water  Improvement  Fund. 

Sewage  Disposal  Fund. 

Municipal  Building  Construction  Fund. 

Rochester  Land  Purchase  Fund. 

School  Building  and  Site  Fund. 

Canal  Land  Purchase  Fund. 

Brown  Street  Subway  Fund. 

Lewiston  Avenue  and  Ridge  Road  Bridge  Fund. 


10 


BUDGET  PROCEDURE 

The  administration  of  funds  is  the  chief  concern  of  the  financial 
officers  of  the  city.  The  most  important  instrument  used  for  this  pur¬ 
pose  is  the  “budget.”  The  term  “budget”  is  used  with  more  or  less 
restricted  meanings  in  various  cities.  In  its  fullest  sense,  a  budget 
comprises  a  complete  program  of  expenditures  and  an  adequate  plan 
for  financing  them.  A  budget  of  this  type  is  supported  by  many  kinds 
of  reports,  statements  and  plans.  An  operating  report  and  a  financial 
report  from  each  department,  the  usual  financial  statements  of  the 
comptroller,  departmental  work  programs  and  estimates,  and  detailed 
revenue,  assessment,  and  borrowing  plans  would  all  be  required  to 
support  a  thorough-going  budget.  The  acceptance  of  such  a  budget 
would  involve,  as  its  final  consummation,  a' levy  of  taxes,  the  fixing  of 
rates  and  charges  for  the  various  miscellaneous  revenues,  the  authoriza¬ 
tion  of  borrowing  and  assessments  and  the  appropriation  of  funds  to  the 
various  departments  and  for  various  purposes. 

Compared  with  an  all-inclusive  budget  of  this  kind,  the  Rochester 
budget  is  very  restricted  in  scope.  As  defined  by  the  charter,  it  covers 
only  current  funds,  those  which  were  classified  above  as  revenue  and 
expense  funds,  namely,  the  General  Fund,  the  Water  Fund  and  the 
Public  Market  Fund.  The  charter  provides  a  procedure  for  assessment 
authorizations  and  loan  authorizations  which  is  entirely  separate  from 
the  budget  procedure. 

The  budget  calendar  prescribed  by  the  charter  is  briefly  as  follows : 

On  or  before  Nov.  i — Estimates  of  all  departments,  except  Depart¬ 
ment  of  Public  Instruction,  are  to  be  presented  to  Mayor. 
(Sec.  28.) 

On  or  before  Dec.  31 — Estimates  of  Department  of  Public  Instruc¬ 
tion  are  to  be  presented  to  Mayor.  (Sec.  28.) 

On  or  before  Dec.  31 — Departmental  reports  on  year’s  work  are 
to  be  presented  to  Mayor.  (Sec.  29.) 

Month  of  January — Board  of  Estimate  and  Apportionment  may 
change  salary  rates  only  during  January.  (Sec.  65.) 

On  or  before  Feb.  14 — Consideration  of  estimates  by  Mayor  and 
Board  is  to  be  completed  and  tentative  budget  submitted  to 
Common  Council.  (Sec.  62.) 


11 


Between  Feb.  15  and  March  15 — Common  Council  is  to  grant  public 
hearing  and  consider  tentative  budget  as  submitted  by  Board. 
(Sec.  105.) 

On  or  before  March  15 — Common  Council  is  to  adopt  budget  as 
submitted  or  amended.  (Sec.  105.) 

April  1-5 — Common  Council  is  to  confirm  tax  rolls  and  levy  annual 
taxes.  (Sec.  107.) 

The  charter  denies  the  Common  Council  power  to  raise  any  items 
of  the  tentative  budget  as  submitted  to  it  by  the  Board  of  Estimate; 
it  may,  however,  reduce  any  items  except  those  relating  to  indebtedness, 
judgments,  and  estimated  revenues.  From  the  foregoing  calendar  and 
the  limitation  on  the  Council’s  power  of  amendment,  it  will  be  seen 
that  the  Rochester  budget  is  an  executive  budget.  The  real  budget 
authority  is  the  Board  of  Estimate  and  Apportionment,  which  the  Mayor 
controls. 

With  respect  to  the  actual  working  out  of  the  budget  calendar  and 
procedure  by  the  Board,  several  facts  should  be  noted.  In  the  first 
place,  departmental  estimates  are  not  submitted  until  January — two 
months  after  the  last  date  allowed  by  the  charter.  An  exception  to 
this  statement  may  be  mentioned  in  connection  with  the  1923  budget. 
By  means  of  cooperation  between  the  Comptroller’s  office  and  the 
Bureau  of  Municipal  Research,  the  department  estimates  for  1923  were 
submitted  on  November  1,  1922.  In  the  second  place,  the  estimates 
are  submitted  on  forms  which  are  prepared  by  the  Comptroller  and 
which  provide  for  an  analysis  by  character,  function,  and  object,  of 
the  last  year’s  expenditures  and  the  estimated  expenditures  for  the 
next  year.  In  the  third  place,  an  effort  has  been  made  to  grant  public 
hearings  during  the  period  that  the  estimates  were  being  considered  by 
the  Board. 

Although  the  departmental  estimates  are  analyzed  and  classified 
by  character,  function  and  object,  this  analysis  does  not  extend  to  the 
appropriation  ordinance.  As  far  as  the  appropriation  is  concerned, 
the  Rochester  budget  is  an  extremely  “lump-sum”  budget.  The  items 
allowed  in  the  appropriation  ordinance  are  not  granted  subject  to  a 
schedule  of  any  kind  except  the  salary  schedule.  The  salary  schedule 
does  control  the  amount  of  money  that  may  be  spent  for  personal  service, 
because  it  prescribes  the  number  of  incumbents  and  the  salary  rates 
attached  to  each  position  in  each  department.  But  outside  of  the  salary 


12 


control,  there  is  nothing  in  the  Rochester  budget  which  prevents  an 
estimated  allowance  for  equipment  from  being  used  for  supplies,  or  an 
estimated  allowance  for  personal  service  from  being  used  for  any  other 
purpose.  The  make-up  of  the  budget,  in  so  far  as  control  over  expendi¬ 
tures  is  concerned,  permits  of  a  minimum  of  control  on  the  part  of  the 
central  officers. 

The  power  to  appropriate  money  resides  mainly  in  the  legislative 
body  of  the  city  government,  but  the  charter  has  granted  to  the  Board 
of  Estimate  and  Apportionment  a  modified  right  to  make  supplementary 
appropriations.  This  power  applies  to  the  so-called  excess  receipts, 
those  arising  from  the  excess  of  actual  revenues  over  estimated  revenues. 
Section  63  of  the  charter  says  in  part,  “  .  .  .  When  any  moneys  or 

revenues  are  received  by  the  city  or  any  department,  board  or  officers 
thereof,  from  any  source  other  than  by  municipal  tax  and  which  are  not 
otherwise  appropriated  or  directed  by  law  to  be  applied,  such  money 
or  revenue  may  be  used  and  applied  towards  and  in  addition  to  the  funds 
appropriated  as  aforesaid,  in  such  manner  as  the  board  of  estimate  and 
apportionment  may  direct.” 

Actual  revenues  are  usually  greater  than  the  estimated  revenues 
upon  which  the  original  appropriations  are  based  and  the  effect  of  the 
foregoing  provision  of  the  charter  is  to  make  it  customary  for  the  various 
departments  to  call  on  the  Board  at  the  end  of  each  year  for  as  large  a 
dole  as  possible  out  of  the  general  pot. 

Inasmuch  as  the  planned  expenditures  of  the  annual  budget  are 
not  covered  by  regular  appropriations  until  the  middle  of  March,  it  is 
necessary  for  the  Council  to  appropriate  monthly  allowances  for  the 
various  departments  for  the  first  three  months  of  the  year  in  anticipation 
of  the  regular  budget.  These  anticipatory  appropriations  go  hand  in 
hand  with  current  monthly  borrowing  to  provide  funds  for  running  the 
government  in  anticipation  of  the  collection  of  taxes  which  begins  May 
1st.  This  type  of  borrowing  will  be  discussed  under  the  head  of  borrowing 
procedure. 

EXPENDITURE  PROCEDURE 

“No  department,  board,  court,  or  officer  is  permitted  during  any 
fiscal  year  to  expend  or  contract  to  be  expended  any  money  or  to  enter 
into  any  contract  which  by  its  terms  involves  the  expenditure  of  money 
in  excess  of  the  amounts  appropriated  in  the  annual  estimate  adopted 


13 


by  the  Common  Council  or  otherwise  lawfully  added  thereto  for  such 
department,  board,  court,  or  office  for  such  fiscal  year  .  .  . 

(Sec.  23,  in  part).  Once  the  Council  has  appropriated  a  sum  of 
money  for  any  department,  the  head  of  that  department  may  go  ahead 
and  incur  expense  or  liability  on  behalf  of  the  city.  Such  action  may 
take  the  form  of  placing  an  employee  on  the  payroll  of  the  city,  subject 
to  the  salary  schedule  and  the  civil  service  regulations;  purchasing 
materials  and  supplies,  subject  to  the  purchasing  procedure  laid  down 
by  the  charter;  or  entering  into  contracts  for  certain  definite  services, 
subject  to  the  contract  procedure  laid  down  by  the  charter.  Contracts 
entered  into  and  open  market  orders  given  are  regarded  as  contingent 
liabilities  of  the  city  and  the  Comptroller  charges  them  against  the 
proper  appropriation  items.  The  yearly  appropriations  are  not  divided 
into  monthly  allotments  and  there  is  nothing  to  prevent  a  spending 
officer  from  spending  all  his  appropriation  the  first  half  of  the  year  if 
he  is  so  minded.  Along  towards  the  end  of  the  year  it  is  customary 
for  the  Comptroller  to  deduct  the  permanent  payroll  (to  the  end  of  the 
year),  the  outstanding  open  market  orders  (requisitions  are  used  in 
Rochester  rather  than  orders  for  registering  contingent  liabilities)  and 
contracts  from  the  unexpended  balances  in  order  to  arrive  at  the  unen¬ 
cumbered  balances  for  each  department. 

The  charter  lays  down  a  specific  procedure  for  passing  and  auditing 
claims.  Claims  are  of  two  general  types — payrolls  and  ordinary  voucher 
claims.  Both  must  pass  through  the  hands  of  the  Comptroller,  whose 
duty  it  is  to  see  that  claims  are  charged  against  the  proper  appropriations, 
that  the  particular  appropriations  are  not  overdrawn  and  that  the  law 
has  been  complied  with  in  all  respects.  It  is  also  his  duty  to  see  that 
payrolls  conform  with  the  salary  schedules  of  the  budget;  that  the 
purchasing  procedure  has  been  correct;  and  that  the  claims  are  properly 
advertised. 

The  Treasurer  also  is  required  by  the  charter  to  “keep  a  separate 
account  with  every  department,  board,  bureau,  court,  office,  appropria¬ 
tion  and  fund  for  which  moneys  are  appropriated  in  the  annual  estimate 
and  raised  by  assessment,  and  must  in  every  check  or  draft  drawn  by 
him  state  particularly  against  which  of  such  funds  it  is  drawn  unless 
the  money  is  drawn  for  use  in  his  office.  He  must  at  no  time  permit 
any  of  the  appropriations  for  the  same  including  moneys  lawfully  added 
thereto  to  be  overdrawn,  or  a  claim  chargeable  to  one  fund  to  be  charged 
to  another.”  (Sec.  162,  in  part.)  The  effect  of  this  provision  is  to 


14 


require  both  the  Comptroller  and  Treasurer  to  keep  fund  and  appro¬ 
priation  accounts  and  to  carry  the  fund  accounting  into  the  cash  account¬ 
ing  ;  in  short  to  split  the  cash  account  into  many  divisions  to  correspond 
with  the  funds. 

As  regards  the  purchasing  procedure,  the  requirements  of  the  charter, 
together  with  custom,  tend  to  delay  the  payment  of  bills  owed  by  the 
city.  The  average  time  elapsing  between  the  delivery  of  goods  to  the 
city  and  the  receipt  of  payment  is  approximately  two  months,  too  long 
a  period  for  the  city  to  take  full  advantage  of  discounts  offered.  More¬ 
over,  there  is  no  central  storehouse  and  the  purchases  for  the  several 
departments  are  made  independently,  no  attempt  being  made  to  coor¬ 
dinate  purchases  of  supplies  used  in  common  by  two  or  more  departments. 

REVENUE  PROCEDURE 

The  resources  of  Rochester’s  “current  budget”  have  customarily 
been  divided  into  two  main  classes:  (i)  general  city  tax  revenue  and 
(2)  miscellaneous  revenue.  The  latter  class  includes  fees,  fines,  interest 
earned,  contributions,  city’s  share  of  state  taxes,  miscellaneous  sales 
and  income,  utility  revenues,  etc.  Usually  the  city  tax  and  the  miscel¬ 
laneous  revenues  have  been  the  only  resources  applied  to  the  current 
budget.  Thus,  the  amount  to  be  raised  by  general  city  tax,  defined 
by  the  charter  as  the  “tax  budget,”  has  been  determined  by  deducting 
the  miscellaneous  revenues  from  the  total  budget. 

Assessment  of  Property  and  Tax  Levy 

The  general  city  tax  has  always  been  the  main  source  of  revenue 
for  financing  the  current  budget.  Technically  the  city  tax  is  a  general 
property  tax,  and,  although  the  state  income  tax  law  exempts  most  personal 
property  from  the  general  property  tax,  it  is  for  all  practical  purposes 
a  real  estate  tax.  Real  estate  is  assessed  for  the  purposes  of  local  taxation 
by  the  Department  of  Assessment  and  Taxation  of  the  city  government. 
This  assessment  by  the  local  assessors  includes  property  owned  by 
corporations  holding  public  franchises,  with  the  exception  of  such  property 
as  is  situated  in,  on,  under  or  over  a  public  street.  This  latter  class  of 
property,  including  intangible  values,  is  called  “special  franchises”  and 
is  assessed  by  the  state  tax  commission.  Special  franchise  valuations 
are  certified  annually  to  the  city  clerk  by  the  state  tax  commission, 
and,  for  purposes  of  calculating  the  tax  and  debt  limits,  are  considered 
as  real  estate. 


15 


The  task  of  assessing  property  is  performed  by  the  assessors  for 
the  most  part  during  the  summer  months.  The  tax  rolls  are  required 
by  the  charter  to  be  completed  by  January  15th,  at  which  time  allega¬ 
tions  are  heard  and  valuations  revised.  By  April  1,  the  rolls  must  be 
delivered  to  the  City  Clerk,  who  turns  them  over  to  the  Common  Council 
for  confirmation  and  for  the  levying  of  taxes. 

Delinquent  Taxes 

At  this  point  it  may  be  advisable  to  mention  a  matter  of  procedure 
which  has  an  important  bearing  on  the  problem  of  collecting  delinquent 
taxes.  The  charter  requires  the  placing  of  some  items  and  permits  the 
placing  of  others  on  the  tax  roll  in  addition  to  the  general  city  tax.  For 
example,  local  improvement  assessments  and  water  charges  which  are 
delinquent  on  March  1,  are  closed  on  the  books  where  they  originally 
appeared  as  charges  and  are  added  to  the  annual  tax.  In  addition  to 
various  delinquent  accounts,  the  annual  tax  roll  carries  the  charges  for 
several  direct  assessments  for  current  services.  The  tax  roll  items,  in¬ 
cluding  the  general  city  tax,  may  be  classified  as  follows: 

Taxes 

Property  Tax. 

Water  Frontage  Tax. 

Delinquent  Accounts 

Watei  Meter  Rates. 

Local  Improvement  Assessments. 

East  Side  Trunk  Sewer  Assessments. 

Sidewalk  Repair  and  Cleaning  Charges — D.  P.  W. 

Public  Safety  Charges — D.  P.  S. 

Direct  Assessments 

Charges  for  Street  Sprinkling. 

Charges  for  Extra  Lighting. 

Charges  for  Snow  Removal  (Plowing). 

Charges  for  Care  and  Embellishment  and  Tree  Planting. 

Of  the  foregoing  items,  the  property  tax  alone  is  levied  on  a  valua¬ 
tion  basis;  the  others  are  levied  on  a  frontage  basis,  except  delinquent 
Department  of  Public  Works  and  Department  of  Public  Safety  charges 
which  are  direct  charges  against  individual  parcels  of  property  for  the 
actual  costs  of  services  performed.  It  is  obvious  that  in  relation  to 
delinquent  accounts,  the  tax  roll  is  a  secondary  method  of  collection 


16 


and  in  relation  to  direct  assessment,  it  is  the  primary  method  of  col¬ 
lection.  The  various  legal,  administrative  and  accounting  aspects  of 
these  charges  are  shown  in  Table  I. 


The  important  point  in  connection  with  this  procedure,  which  is 
an  admirable  one  in  many  respects,  is  that  the  various  additions  to  taxes 
are  liens  against  the  property  taxed.  When  the  items  are  placed  on 
the  annual  tax  roll,  they  are  merged  for  legal  purposes  and  become 
one  aggregate  lien  against  each  parcel  of  property.  The  merging  of  the 
various  delinquent  accounts  into  the  tax  lien  provides  a  single  and 
effective  method  of  compelling  collection.  A  recent  charter  amendment 
makes  it  unnecessary  to  hold  these  delinquent  accounts  open  as  resources 
of  their  respective  funds  until  collection.  On  the  contrary,  the  open 
accounts  in  the  water  and  assessment  funds  are  closed  at  the  time  of 
transfer  to  the  tax  roll;  the  tax  account  of  the  general  fund  “buys” 
them,  so  to  speak;  they  are  converted  into  a  tax  and  the  general  fund 
compensates  the  other  funds  for  the  face  value  of  the  assets  taken  over. 
Each  taxpayer  receives  a  bill  specifying  the  items  which  go  to  make  up 
the  total  charge  levied  against  his  property.  But  in  law  there  is  just 
the  one  charge,  and  that  is  a  lien  on  the  property. 


Taxes  are  due  May  i  of  each  year,  and  may  be  paid  any  time  be¬ 
tween  May  i  and  November  15.  The  following  interest  charges  are 
added  to  the  taxes: — 


If  the  taxes  are  paid 

May  1-3 1 .  .  .  . 
June  1-15. . . . 
June  16-30 . . . . 

July  1-15 - 

July  16-31. . . . 
Aug.  1-15.... 
Aug.  16-31 
Sept.  1-15 .  .  .  . 
Sept.  16-30 .  .  .  . 
Oct.  1-15  .  .  .  . 
Oct.  16-31 .  .  .  . 
Nov.  1-15  .  .  .  . 


No  interest 

x% 

1% 

i#% 

2% 

2^% 

3% 

3^% 

4% 

4^% 

5% 

5^% 


Ten  per  cent  per  annum  is  added  for  all  time  after  November  15.  Novem¬ 
ber  15  is  the  date  after  which  unpaid  taxes  are  regarded  as  delinquent. 


17 


The  charter  provides  in  general  for  two  methods  of  procedure  in 
collecting  delinquent  taxes.  It  provides  in  the  first  place  that  the 
Treasurer  may  issue  warrants  to  collectors  authorizing  them  to  collect 
the  tax,  by  distress  and  sale  of  personal  property  if  necessary.  A  penalty 
of  five  per  cent  is  added  in  this  case  for  collector’s  fee.  The  method  of 
collecting  taxes  by  tax  collectors  applies  both  to  personal  and  real  estate 
taxes  and  was  the  main  reliance  of  the  Treasurer  up  to  several  years  ago. 
This  method,  however,  has  now  been  abandoned  and  the  city  relies 
entirely  upon  the  second  general  method  of  collection,  namely,  legal 
proceedings  on  the  part  of  the  Corporation  Counsel.  These  legal  pro¬ 
ceedings  may  be  of  three  kinds: — 

a — Supplementary  proceedings, 

b — Actions, 

c — Tax  lien  foreclosures. 

The  first  two  may  be  used  in  the  case  of  personal  taxes  and  any  of  the 
three  in  the  case  of  real  estate.  As  the  new  tax  law  makes  personal  taxes 
a  negligible  quantity,  the  primary  method  relied  upon  for  the  collection 
of  taxes  at  the  present  time  is  the  tax  lien  foreclosure. 

Briefly,  the  procedure  for  foreclosing  tax  liens  is  as  follows:  After 
advertising,  the  Treasurer  transmits  to  the  Corporation  Counsel  in 
January  of  each  year  a  list  of  delinquent  personal  taxes  which  became 
due  the  preceding  year  and  a  list  of  delinquent  real  estate  taxes  which 
became  due  the  second  year  preceding.  A  charge  of  fifty  cents  is  added 
to  each  delinquent  account  advertised  and  reported  to  the  Law  Depart¬ 
ment.  The  Corporation  Counsel  selects  the  cases  which  involve  the 
largest  amounts  of  money  and  the  least  legal  complication  and  serves 
notices  on  the  property  owners  that  foreclosure  proceedings  are  about 
to  be  opened.  A  further  fee  of  one  dollar  is  added  to  the  tax  account 
to  cover  the  cost  of  this  service.  The  serving  of  the  notices  has  the 
effect  of  bringing  in  a  good  many  taxpayers  to  settle  their  accounts 
before  they  are  taken  into  court.  In  case  the  action  to  foreclose  the 
tax  lien  is  carried  through,  the  proceeds  of  the  execution,  as  admin¬ 
istered  by  the  referee,  are  applied  first  to  court  costs,  second  to 
“disbursements”  and,  finally,  to  the  satisfaction  of  the  tax  and  assess¬ 
ment  lien.  The  oldest  delinquent  accounts  are  taken  care  of  first,  then 
the  next  oldest,  and  so  on  until  the  money  runs  out.  Very  rarely  does 
it  happen  that  there  is  enough  money  from  a  tax  sale  to  cover  all  the 
costs  and  to  reimburse  the  city  entirely  for  its  tax  and  assessment  lien. 


18 


Those  accounts  for  which  there  is  not  sufficient  foreclosure  money  are, 
nevertheless,  closed  out  and  charged  to  the  appropriation  account, 
“Rebates  of  Taxes  and  Assessments.” 

Recently  a  “Tax  Foreclosure”  fund  was  created  for  the  use  of  the 
Law  Department.  The  resources  of  this  fund  are  the  receipts  from  the 
sale  of  tax  lien  real  estate  and  they  are  to  be  applied  by  the  city  to  the 
purchase  of  land  in  tax  lien  foreclosure  cases.  Previous  to  the  creation 
of  this  fund,  it  was  impossible  for  the  city  to  bid  at  a  tax  sale  more 
than  the  costs  and  the  disbursements.  Now  the  citv  can  bid  the 
full  amount,  can  clear  its  delinquent  tax  accounts,  and  can  hold  the 
property  purchased  to  determine  the  trend  of  the  real  estate  market  or 
the  availability  of  the  property  for  local  improvement  use. 

Miscellaneous  Revenues 

All  the  revenues  of  the  city  other  than  the  general  city  tax  revenue 
are  lumped  together  under  the  title  “Miscellaneous  Revenues.”  They 
are  of  various  kinds  and  sources.  Until  a  few  years  ago,  one  of  the  most 
important  sources  of  miscellaneous  revenue  was  liquor  license  receipts. 
This  has  now  been  displaced  by  other  new  sources  such  as  the  city’s 
share  of  the  state  income  tax.  The  state  income  tax  consists  of  two 
parts — a  corporation  income  tax  and  a  personal  income  tax.  Of  the 
corporation  tax,  the  city  receives  one  third  of  the  collections  from  Roch¬ 
ester  corporations;  of  the  personal  income  tax,  the  city  receives  a  one- 
half  share,  based  on  the  ratio  of  the  assessed  valuation  of  Rochester 
property  to  the  total  state  valuation.  [The  receipts  from  the  personal 
income  tax,  it  is  evident,  are  somewhat  dependent  on  the  assessed  prop¬ 
erty  valuations  and  a  raising  of  the  assessments  toward  the  ioo  per  cent 
basis  would  result  in  larger  revenue  from  this  source.]  A  share  of  the 
bank  stock  tax,  which  is  collected  by  the  county,  is  also  turned  over  to 
the  city  and  added  to  its  miscellaneous  revenues.  This  tax  has  been 
declared  unconstitutional  and  the  city  has  refunded  its  proper  share  of 
the  collections. 

Interest  on  delinquent  taxes  and  interest  on  general  fund  bank 
balances  bring  in  a  substantial  revenue.  There  also  are  fines  and  various 
license  and  permit  fees.  In  addition  to  these,  many  of  the  departments 
derive  a  revenue  from  their  incidental  operations.  Charges  for  service 
rendered  or  for  commodities  sold  make  up  the  largest  part  of  the  depart¬ 
mental  revenues.  As  examples  of  these,  there  may  be  mentioned  bath 
house  receipts,  lunch  room.  sales,  sale  of  tankage  and  grease  from  the 


19 


garbage  plant,  rent  of  market  stalls,  rent  of  public  buildings  and 
sale  of  old  materials.  The  largest  departmental  revenues  come  from 
the  utility  departments.  Although  these  are  listed  with  the  miscel¬ 
laneous  revenues,  they  are  not  applicable  to  the  general  fund  but  are 
resources  of  the  special  utility  funds.  The  Department  of  Public  Instruc¬ 
tion  receives  a  contribution  from  the  state  based  on  enrollment  and  on 
teachers  employed.  Since  the  Lockwood  teachers’  salary  bill  became 
law,  the  city  has  received  a  much  larger  amount  from  the  state.  The 
Rochester  quota  is  $550  per  teacher  and  is  intended  to  recompense  the 
city  for  raising  teachers’  salaries  in  compliance  with  the  law. 

Several  methods  have  been  provided  for  collecting  miscellaneous 
revenues.  Most  of  the  license  fees  are  collected  by  the  Treasurer, 
although  some  are  collected  by  the  City  Clerk  and  some  by  the  Health 
Bureau.  All  contributions  and  quotas  from  the  state  or  county,  as 
well  as  all  interest  accruals,  are  of  course  collected  through  the  Treasurer. 
Water  rates  are  collected  by  the  Treasurer;  charges  for  meters  sold  and 
miscellaneous  sales  and  services  are  collected  by  the  department.  Prac¬ 
tically  all  department  revenues  are  collected  in  this  fashion — that  is, 
directly  by  the  department  concerned — and  the  cash  is  turned  over  to  the 
Treasurer.  Detailed  information  respecting  the  legal  authority,  proce¬ 
dure  and  rates  of  fee  for  the  various  Rochester  licenses  is  shown  in  the 
appended  Table  No.  2. 

Miscellaneous  receipts  are  not  spread  equally  over  the  year.  Con¬ 
tributions  from  outside  jurisdictions  are  received  sporadically;  license 
fees  are  received  mainly  in  January;  departmental  revenues  are  seasonal. 
Water  revenues  alone  are  fairly  evenly  distributed  over  the  year,  the 
revenues  accruing  every  month  of  the  year. 

ASSESSMENT  PROCEDURE 

The  procedure  for  authorizing  the  construction  of  local  improve¬ 
ments  and  the  levying  of  assessments  to  pay  for  the  cost  is  laid  down 
in  detail  by  the  charter.  The  Council  may  authorize  an  improvement 
and  may  direct  that  the  whole  of  the  expense  of  such  improvement  be 
charged  against  the  property  benefited,  or  with  the  consent  of  the  Board 
of  Estimate  and  Apportionment,  that  the  whole  or  part  of  it  be  borne 
by  the  city  at  large. 

Local  Improvements 

Consideration  of  a  proposed  local  improvement  may  be  begun  by 
the  city  on  its  own  initiative  or  as  the  result  of  a  petition  from  interested 


20 


property  owners.  In  either  case  the  Council  requires  the  City  Engineer 
to  make  an  estimate  of  the  total  cost  and  the  maximum  cost  per  front 
foot.  As  soon  as  the  Engineer  makes  his  report  on  estimated  cost,  the 
Council  passes  a  “first  ordinance,”  declaring  its  intention  to  require  a 
specific  improvement  to  be  made,  giving  the  estimated  cost,  the  amount 
to  be  paid  by  the  city  (if  any),  the  part  of  the  city  assessed,  and  the 
time  for  hearing  allegations  thereon.  [If  the  first  ordinance  is  amended 
to  increase  the  cost,  new  public  notices  must  be  given  and  allegations 
heard  again.]  The  “final  ordinance”  specifies  in  addition  the  number 
of  equal  annual  installments  in  which  the  assessments  are  to  be  payable. 
The  number  of  installments  is  limited  by  the  charter,  as  follows: — 

(a)  When  the  estimated  maximum  cost  per  front  foot  is  not  more 
than  $1.00,  there  may  be  not  over  three  installments. 

(b)  $i.oi  to  $3.00 — not  over  five  installments. 

(c)  $3.01  to  $5.00 — not  over  seven  installments. 

(d)  Over  $5.00 — not  more  than  ten  installments. 

A  “final  ordinance”  requires  a  two-thirds  vote  of  the  Council  for  its 
passage,  unless  the  improvement  has  been  requested  by  petition  of  a 
majority  of  the  property  owners  affected. 

Detailed  account  of  the  expense  incurred  under  each  local  improve¬ 
ment  ordinance  is  kept  by  the  City  Engineer  and  by  the  Comptroller. 
The  charter  places  on  the  Comptroller  the  duty  of  ascertaining  the  ex¬ 
pense  of  each  local  improvement  which  is  to  be  assessed.  The  total 
expense  as  certified  by  him  must  include 

(1)  All  damages  or  awards, 

(2)  All  expense  of  construction, 

(3)  Interest  on  the  money  involved  to  the  time  when  the  first 
installment  is  due. 

The  items  which  go  to  make  up  the  total  cost  are  listed  as  follows  in 
the  Comptroller’s  report  to  the  Assessors: — 

Amount  paid  to  contractor. 

Amount  paid  for  cartage. 

Amount  paid  for  advertising. 

Amount  paid  for  stakes. 

Amount  paid  for  local  inspection. 

Amount  paid  for  general  inspection. 

Amount  paid  for  labor  by  Street  Department, 

Amount  paid  for  miscellaneous. 

Charge  for  interest. 

Total. 


21 


In  calculating  interest  charges,  the  Comptroller  uses  the  average  rate 
paid  by  the  city  to  secure  cash  for  its  assessment  funds  in  anticipation  of 
assessments  levied.  The  rate  used  at  the  present  time  is  four  and  one- 
half  per  cent.  The  term  used  varies,  the  interest  being  calculated  on 
each  particular  disbursement  from  the  date  of  the  disbursement  to  the 
date  when  the  first  installment  is  due. 

Collection  of  Assessments 

When  an  improvement  has  been  completed  and  the  total  cost 
certified  by  the  Comptroller,  it  is  the  duty  of  the  Assessors  to  make 
up  assessment  rolls  and  distribute  the  cost  on  a  frontage  basis.  The 
charter  requires  that  the  Assessors  furnish  the  Treasurer  with  a  separate 
assessment  roll  for  each  local  improvement  ordinance.  The  Council 
has  the  power  to  correct  errors  in  assessments  or  to  reassess.  Every 
assessment  roll  must  be  confirmed  by  the  Council  before  going  to  the 
Treasurer. 

Local  assessments  are  due  on  the  first  day  of  the  month  following 
the  receipt  of  the  roll  by  the  Treasurer,  if  the  roll  is  received  before  the 
fifteenth;  they  are  due  on  the  fifteenth  of  the  following  month  if  received 
on  or  after  that  date.  The  Treasurer  gives  five  days’  public  notice  of 
every  local  assessment  and  has  bills  printed  to  send  to  the  property 
owners  assessed.  The  bills  show  the  aggregate  assessment  and  also 
indicate  the  dates  on  which  the  various  installments  are  due. 

The  aggregate  assessment  or  any  of  the  installments  may  be  paid 

at  any  time,  but  if  the  whole  assessment  is  not  paid  at  the  time  that  the 

first  installment  is  due,  interest  at  the  rate  of  six  per  cent  per  annum 

* 

will  be  charged  from  the  time  of  the  first  installment  until  the  time  of 
payment.  As  was  stated  above,  if  an  assessment  or  an  installment 
thereof  is  due  but  is  not  paid  by  the  first  of  March  the  delinquent  assess¬ 
ment  is  added  to  the  tax  roll.  In  such  a  case,  the  interest  charged  is 
ten  per  cent  per  annum  from  the  time  the  assessment  was  due  until 
June  first  following.  Thus  the  city  has  no  separate  problem  of  collecting 
delinquent  assessments. 

The  East  Side  Trunk  Sewer  Fund  is  a  special  assessment  fund 
created  by  the  charter  to  finance  the  construction  of  the  East  Side 
Trunk  Sewer.  It  is  provided  that  in  1908  and  every  five  years  thereafter 
the  Council  shall  determine  the  amount  necessary 


22 


(1)  To  pay  bonds  falling  due  in  the  five-year  period. 

(2)  To  pay  any  additional  bonds. 

(3)  To  pay  interest  on  bonds. 

(4)  To  pay  any  additional  assessment  for  the  reconstruction  of  a 

sewer  or  disposal  plant. 

(5)  To  pay  interest  to  the  time  of  the  first  installment. 

(6)  To  pay  expenses  incident  to  making  assessments. 

The  assessments,  as  thus  determined,  are  payable  in  five  equal  annual 
installments.  The  procedure  for  making  up  the  East  Side  Trunk  Sewer 
rolls  and  for  collections  and  for  adding  delinquents  to  the  tax  roll  is 
the  same  as  in  the  case  of  regular  local  improvement  assessments. 

Government  property,  i.  e.,  property  belonging  to  the  city,  county, 
state,  or  United  States,  is  exempted  from  taxation  but  is  not  exempted 
from  its  share  of  local  assessments.  Hence  the  local  assessment  rolls 
include  government  owned  as  well  as  privately  owned  parcels  of  property 
and  show  the  charges  against  them  in  the  same  way.  There  is  this 
difference,  however, — the  total  cost  chargeable  against  the  government 
is  regarded  as  being  payable  in  only  one  installment  and  if  not  paid 
when  due  it  has  no  interest  added  to  it  for  delinquency.  Nor  can  it  be 
added  to  taxes  as  are  other  delinquent  assessments. 

Theoretically,  the  city’s  share  of  local  assessments  is  to  be  taken 
care  of  every  year  and  out  of  a  special  appropriation  item  called  “ City’s 
Share  of  Local  Assessments.”  Of  recent  years,  this  item  has  been 
excluded  from  the  budget,  inasmuch  as  the  city  doesn’t  have  to  pay  a 
penalty  for  delinquency,  and  because  the  charges  have  reached  onerous 
proportions. 

BORROWING  PROCEDURE 

“The  Common  Council  has  power  from  time  to  time  to  borrow 
money  for  city  purposes  and  to  cause  to  be  issued  therefor,  in  amounts 
designated  by  it,  notes  of  the  city  directed  by  it  and  running  for  a  period 
not  exceeding  eight  months,  and  bearing  interest  at  a  rate  fixed  by  the 
Common  Council,  or  at  its  option  by  competition,  not  exceeding  the 
legal  rate  of  interest  per  annum,  and  bonds  of  the  city,  signed  by  the 
Mayor  and  Treasurer,  sealed  with  the  corporate  seal  and  countersigned 
by  the  Comptroller  and  at  the  option  of  the  Common  Council,  by  a 
transfer  agent  designated  by  it,  payable  and  transferable  at  such  places 
as  the  Common  Council  may  designate,  running  for  a  period  or  different 


23 


periods  determined  by  the  Common  Council  not  exceeding  thirty  years, 
bearing  interest  at  a  rate  fixed  by  the  Common  Council  not  exceeding 
the  legal  rate  of  interest  per  annum;  such  notes  and  bonds  to  be  sold 
under  the  direction  of  the  Comptroller,  after  competition,  upon  sealed 
proposals  at  not  less  than  par.  Bonds  issued  to  meet  appropriations 
for  current  expenses  not  anticipated  or  provided  for  out  of  current  rev¬ 
enues  shall  run  for  a  period  not  exceeding  five  years . The 

provisions  of  any  general  law  or  special  law  do  not  govern  or  apply  to 
the  issuance  and  sale  of  the  notes  and  bonds  herein  authorized.  Nor 
shall  any  such  law  unless  hereafter  enacted  and  specifically  expressing 
an  intention  so  to  do,  limit  or  affect  the  power  of  the  Common  Council 
to  authorize  the  issuance  of  notes  or  bonds  or  to  make  appropriations.” 
(Sec.  96,  Charter.) 

This  grant  of  borrowing  power  is  very  broad  and  gives  wide  discre¬ 
tion  to  the  city  officials  to  issue  securities  for  any  purpose  which  can  be 
regarded  as  a  “city  purpose.”  The  important  limitations  may  be 
specified  as  follows: 

(1)  The  maximum  interest  rate,  for  both  notes  and  bonds,  is  six 

per  cent. 

(2)  Neither  notes  nor  bonds  may  be  sold  for  less  than  par. 

(3)  The  maximum  term  for  notes  is  eight  months  and  for  bonds 

thirty  years  (except  bonds  issued  for  current  expenses,  in 

which  case  the  maximum  term  is  five  years) . 

(4)  Competition  for  notes  may  be  expressed  in  a  variable  interest 

rate  or  premium.  Competition  for  bonds  may  be  expressed 

in  a  variable  premium  only. 

The  kinds  of  borrowing  in  which  the  city  engages  may  be  classified 
as  follows: 

(1)  Tax  anticipation  borrowing. 

(2)  Tax  revenue  borrowing  (overdue  taxes). 

(3)  Current  expense  borrowing. 

(4)  Borrowing  for  capital  outlays  or  permanent  improvements. 

(a)  To  provide  working  capital  for  assessment  funds. 

(b)  To  provide  capital  for  loan  funds. 

Tax  anticipation  borrowing  is  made  necessary  by  the  fact  that  the 
expenditures  of  the  current  year’s  budget  begin  in  January,  whereas 
the  tax  revenues  do  not  come  in  until  May  and  June.  In  order  to  provide 
funds  for  the  operation  of  the  government  the  first  four  months  of  the 


24 


year,  so-called  “revenue”  notes  are  issued  each  month;  those  issued  in 
January  running  five  months,  those  issued  in  February  running  four 
months,  those  issued  in  March  running  three  months,  and  those  issued 
in  April  running  two  months.  The  notes  mature  approximately  the 
middle  of  June  when  tax  collections  are  at  their  peak  and  out  of  which 
they  are  liquidated.  The  four  series  of  tax  anticipation  notes  in  1922 
aggregated  $3,300,000  and  cost  $36,712.50  in  interest. 

Tax  revenue  borrowing  is  another  kind  of  temporary  borrowing 
necessary  to  convert  the  resources  of  the  general  fund  into  liquid  form. 
At  the  end  of  every  year  some  of  the  tax  revenue  is  still  uncollected, 
i.  e.,  delinquent;  but  the  budget  appropriations  cover  the  whole  revenue 
whether  or  not  it  can  all  be  collected  the  first  year.  Thus  it  is  necessary 
to  secure  funds  to  finance  the  regular  expenditures  at  the  end  of  the  year 
and  the  notes  issued  are  liquidated  out  of  the  delinquent  tax  accounts 
when  they  are  finally  collected,  either  directly  by  the  Treasurer  or  indi¬ 
rectly  by  the  Law  Department.  As  it  is  usually  two  or  three  years 
before  all  the  delinquent  accounts  of  a  particular  tax  levy  can  be  closed 
and  as  new  levies  constantly  give  rise  to  new  delinquent  accounts,  the 
city  must  always  carry  a  greater  or  less  amount  of  tax  receivable  assets 
on  its  books.  These  assets  must  be  covered  by  revenue  borrowing,  and 
the  city  will  constantly  have  revenue  notes  outstanding,  unless  there  is  a 
large  unapplied  general  fund  surplus.  These  notes  in  Rochester  are 
called  “overdue  tax  notes,”  and  the  amount  outstanding  at  the  end  of 
1922  was  $315,000.00. 

Borrowing  for  Current  Expense 

Current  expense  borrowing  arises  out  of  several  conditions.  It 
may  be  a  part  of  the  budget  plan  that  some  of  the  current  year’s  expendi¬ 
tures  should  be  financed  by  borrowing.  The  securities  issued  may  be 
temporary  notes  which  can  be  carried  along  by  continual  renewal,  or 
funded  into  bonds,  or  taken  care  of  out  of  the  next  year’s  budget.  Then 
again  current  borrowing  may  be  necessary  to  provide  for  deficiencies 
such  as  occur  when  unforeseen  emergencies  arise  or  when  the  budget 
plan  is  not  adequately  enforced.  In  general,  it  may  be  said  that  borrow¬ 
ing  for  current  expenses  is  an  undesirable  practice,  unless  required  by 
emergency  or  legal  complications.  Prior  to  1919  it  had  been  resorted 
to  in  Rochester  only  to  a  slight  extent.  Since  1919  this  type  of  borrowing 
has  increased  to  amounts  of  considerable  magnitude.  Examples  from 


25 


recent  years  are  School  Repair  and  Equipment  Notes  (1919)  and  General 
and  School  Current  Expense  Notes  (1920,  1921  and  1922). 

While  borrowing  is  the  exceptional  thing  in  the  case  of  financing 
current  expenditures,  it  is,  on  the  other  hand,  the  primary  means  relied 
upon  to  finance  capital  outlays  and  permanent  improvements.  The 
improvements  thus  financed  are  of  two  kinds — (1)  the  so-called  local 
improvements  and  (2)  general  city  improvements.  Local  improvements 
are  those  which  are  to  be  paid  for  ultimately,  either  in  whole  or  in  part, 
by  reimbursements  from  the  property  owners  directly  benefited.  General 
city  improvements  are  those  which  are  to  be  paid  for  by  the  taxpayers 
as  a  whole  through  taxation. 

Assessment  Fund  Borrowing 

Local  improvements  are  handled  through  assessment  funds,  which 
have  been  discussed  previously.  Borrowing  is  resorted  to  in  the  case  of 
these  funds,  not  to  pay  for  the  improvements,  but  merely  to  provide 
working  capital  in  anticipation  of  the  ultimate  reimbursements.  This 
capital  is  necessary  for  the  period  of  construction,  for  the  time  allowed 
for  payment  by  installment,  and  for  the  time  necessary  to  transfer  delin¬ 
quent  accounts  to  the  tax  roll.  It  is  not  the  practice  in  Rochester  to 
issue  bonds  to  cover  the  cost  of  each  particular  local  improvement 
(except  in  the  case  of  the  East  Side  Trunk  Sewer  and  a  few  other  minor 
exceptions),  but  rather  to  issue  bonds  for  large  amounts  sufficient  to 
cover  the  needs  of  the  Local  Improvement  Fund  as  a  whole,  whether 
there  are  a  dozen  ordinances  involved  or  a  hundred.  Rochester’s  Local 
Improvement  bond  issues  have  in  recent  years  been  both  of  the  “term'’ 
and  “serial”  type  and  have  the  maximum  life  allowed  by  the  charter, 
namely,  thirty  years.  No  particular  provision  is  made  for  the  redemp¬ 
tion  of  local  improvement  bonds,  except  the  automatic  one  of  compulsory 
assessments.  The  status  of  the  fund  at  the  time  of  maturity  determines 
whether  a  particular  “term”  bond  shall  be  paid  or  refunded.  Serial 
bonds  must  of  course  be  paid  serially  out  of  collected  assessments. 

Loan  Fund  Borrowing 

General  city  improvements  are  handled  through  loan  funds.  Unlike 
the  assessment  funds,  there  is  a  separate  loan  fund  and  a  separate  bond 
issue  for  each  improvement  or  kind  of  improvement.  Thus  there  is 
outstanding  at  the  present  time,  besides  water  bonds  and  public  market 
bonds,  the  following  general  bonds: — 


26 


Sewage  Disposal  Bonds. 

Garbage  Disposal  Bonds. 

Incinerator  Bonds. 

Convention  Hall  Purchase  Bonds. 

Exposition  Park  Purchase  Bonds. 

Fire  House  Construction  Bonds. 

Voting  Machine  Purchase  Bonds. 

City  Garage  Bonds. 

Library  Alteration  and  Equipment  Bonds. 

Park  Bonds. 

Playground  Bonds. 

School  Bonds 

Municipal  Building  Bonds. 

Rochester  and  State  R.  R.  Bonds 

Municipal  Improvement  Bonds. 

Canal  Land  Purchase  Bonds. 

Equipment  (Street  Cleaning)  Bonds. 

Municipal  Land  Purchase  Bonds. 

As  soon  as  a  loan  fund  has  been  authorized,  contracts  are  let  and 
the  authorized  expenditures  are  made.  It  is  the  practice  to  secure  the 
necessary  funds  for  current  demands  by  issuing  short  term  notes  instead 
of  bonds.  This  system  provides  the  money  only  as  needed  and  saves  the 
payment  of  interest  on  a  large  amount  of  money  which  would  not  be 
spent  immediately  if  bonds  were  issued  at  the  beginning.  When  several 
note  issues  have  accumulated  or  when  the  authorized  expenditures  are 
completed,  the  aggregate  is  funded  by  selling  bonds  and  redeeming  the 
notes  with  the  proceeds. 

Interest  due  on  all  outstanding  notes  and  bonds  is  a  fixed  charge 
against  the  various  funds  concerned.  Interest  on  the  water  indebtedness 
is; payable  out  of  the  water  fund,  that  on  market  bonds  out  of  the  market 
fund/ and  that  on  the  assessment  bonds  and  notes  out  of  the  assessment 
funds.  Interest  on  all  other  indebtedness  is  payable  out  of  the  general 
fund. 

Redemption  of  Debt 

The  indebtedness  of  the  city  is  redeemed  in  various  ways.  For 
the  redemption  of  temporary  notes  issued  in  anticipation  of  taxes,  for 
overdue  taxes,  or  for  current  deficiencies,  the  provision  is  automatic. 
By  the  nature  of  the  case  they  are  redeemed  out  of  the  revenues  of  the 


27 


general  fund  either  in  the  current  or  succeeding  budgets.  Likewise 
assessment  indebtedness  is  redeemed  out  of  assessment  collections. 
The  redemption  of  loan  fund  indebtedness  depends  upon  the  nature  of 
the  securities  and  then  again  upon  the  provisions  for  redemption  that 
are  laid  down  in  the  charter  or  the  authorizing  ordinances.  If  the  bonds 
are  of  the  serial  type,  a  certain  definite  portion  of  the  indebtedness  auto¬ 
matically  matures  every  year  and  the  serial  installments  are  contract 
liabilities  which  must  be  met.  If  the  bonds  are  of  the  ordinary  “term” 
type,  special  provision  must  be  made  for  redemption  outside  the  indebt¬ 
edness  contract  itself.  The  method  used  is  the  creation  of  sinking 
funds.  This  is  why  bonds  which  are  not  of  the  “serial”  type  are  some¬ 
times  called  “sinking-fund  bonds.” 

The  purpose  of  a  sinking  fund  is  to  set  aside  periodically  out  of 
current  revenues  installments  which  with  accumulated  interest  earned 
can  be  applied  toward  the  redemption  of  the  principal  of  a  debt  at  its 
maturity.  A  sinking  fund  scientifically  made  up  would  provide  for 
an  actuarially  determined  installment  which  with  accumulated  interest 
(earned  either  at  the  bank  or  through  investment)  would  be  sufficient 
at  the  time  of  maturity  to  “amortize”  the  loan,  i.  e.,  redeem  it  com¬ 
pletely.  Sinking  funds  are  not  always  created  scientifically  nor  are  the 
accumulated  funds  always  wisely  handled  and  invested.  Sometimes  it 
is  provided  that  certain  specific  revenues  should  be  placed  in  a  sinking 
fund  or  that  a  certain  percentage  of  the  principal  or  a  fixed  amount 
should  be  set  aside  every  year  as  a  sinking  fund.  These  are  all  make¬ 
shift  methods  of  establishing  sinking  funds  and  determining  the 
installments. 

With  regard  to  the  necessity  of  providing  adequate  redemption 
for  its  indebtedness  and  with  regard  to  sinking  funds,  the  charter  of  the 
City  of  Rochester  says: — 

“The  Common  Council  has  power  to  create  a  sinking  fund  for  the 
redemption  of  bonds  herein  authorized,  and  to  provide  that  there  must 
be  deposited  therein  annually  fixed  sums  or  percentages  of  the  appro¬ 
priations  or  revenues  of  the  department,  board,  bureau  or  office  for  the 
benefit  of  which  the  bonds  are  issued;  or  it  may  provide  that  a  certain 
sum  must  be  raised  annually  by  taxes  and  added  to  such  sinking  fund; 
or  it  may  provide  other  means  of  paying  or  redeeming  the  bonds  at 
maturity,  or  it  may  redeem  the  same  by  the  issue  of  new  bonds;  or  it 
may  issue  the  same  without  creating  a  sinking  fund,  or  making  other 
provisions  for  the  redemption  thereof . ”  (Sec.  96  in  part.) 


28 


In  addition  to  the  above  general  provisions,  the  charter  makes 
specific  provisions  for  the  following  sinking  funds : — 

General  Sinking  Fund. 

Water  Sinking  Fund  (General). 

Water  Distributing  Sinking  Fund. 

Hemlock  Lake  Watershed  Sinking  Fund. 

Park  Sinking  Fund. 

High  School  Sinking  Fund. 

School  Sinking  Fund. 

Public  Market  Sinking  Fund. 

Of  these,  the  Water  Distributing,  High  School,  and  School  Sinking 
Funds  are  no  longer  in  existence,  having  served  the  purpose  for  which 
they  were  created. 

The  Public  Market  Sinking  Fund  installment  is  to  consist  of  “all 
revenues  from  hucksters’  licenses  except  the  part  thereof  directed  to 
be  paid  into  the  police  pension  fund,  and  an  annual  sum  raised  by  taxa¬ 
tion  or  taken  from  the  revenues  of  the  market,  sufficient  to  redeem  at 
maturity  the  public  market  bonds.”  (Sec.  158.)  It  is  the  practice  to 
credit  this  sinking  fund  every  year  with  the  whole  surplus  of  the  current 
Market  Fund,  and  this  has  been  more  than  sufficient  in  recent  years  to 
amortize  the  bonds  outstanding.  Market  bonds  amounting  to  $78,000 
were  held  as  investments  in  the  Water  Sinking  Funds  and  were  paid 
from  the  Market  Sinking  Fund  in  1922. 

The  annual  installment  of  $18,500,  which  was  required  by  the  charter 
to  be  added  to  the  Hemlock  Lake  Sinking  Fund,  has  also  resulted  in  an 
accumulation  which  will  be  more  than  sufficient  at  maturity  to  redeem 
the  Hemlock  Lake  Watershed  bonds.  The  transfer  of  this  installment 
has,  therefore,  been  stopped. 

The  Water  Sinking  Fund  is  a  general  sinking  fund  which  may  be 
applied  “for  the  purpose  of  redeeming  bonds  of  the  city  now  or  hereafter 
issued  for  the  construction,  extension,  betterment,  repair,  and  main¬ 
tenance  of  the  water  works  system  and  for  the  redemption  of  which 
there  is  no  sinking  fund  or  an  insufficient  sinking  fund  provided.” 
(Sec.  152.)  The  resources  of  this  fund  are  three: — 

(1)  $30,000  annually  out  of  water  revenues. 

(2)  The  annual  surplus  of  the  Water  Fund. 

(3)  The  surplus  of  any  special  water  sinking  fund. 


29 


The  resources  of  the  Park  Sinking  Fund  are  annual  installments  of 
$3,600  out  of  current  taxes  until  such  time  as  the  fund  “contains  a  sum 
sufficient  to  pay  and  redeem  the  park  bonds  or  any  re-issue  thereof.” 
This  installment,  which  is  one  per  cent  of  the  original  principal  of  the 
debt,  will  not 'be  sufficient  to  amortize  the  bonds,  it  being  estimated 
that  there  will  be  a  deficit  of  about  $100,000.00. 

The  General  Sinking  Fund  may  be  used  “to  retire  bonds  of  the  city 
now  or  hereafter  issued  for  which  no  sinking  fund  or  an  insufficient  sink¬ 
ing  fund  is  provided.”  (Sec.  151.)  The  resources  of  the  fund  consist 
of  the  annual  surpluses  of  the  General  Fund  and  the  surpluses  of  any 
other  sinking  funds  except  those  created  for  the  redemption  of  water 
works  bonds. 

The  General  Fund  surpluses  and  the  Water  Fund  surpluses  have 
not  been  credited  annually  to  the  respective  sinking  funds,  except  when 
funds  were  actually  needed  to  redeem  bonds.  The  reason  for  not  trans¬ 
ferring  these  surpluses  “each  year,”  as  provided  by  the  charter,  is  that 
to  do  so  would  necessitate  the  borrowing  of  more  money  to  finance  the 
current  budget  than  is  now  necessary.  That  is,  these  surpluses  are  used 
as  working  funds  at  the  end  of  the  year  when  the  fund  resources  consist 
mainly  of  uncollected  taxes  and  water  rates.  If  the  surplus  moneys 
were  not  available  for  this  purpose,  it  would  be  necessary  to  issue  more 
Overdue  Tax  notes  and  to  issue  also  some  “Overdue  Water”  notes. 

The  charter  sinking  funds  as  discussed  above  are  not  the  only  ones 
on  the  books  of  the  city.  In  accordance  with  the  power  granted  it  in 
the  general  bond  section  (Sec.  96),  the  Common  Council  has  created 
sinking  funds  by  ordinance.  These  sinking  funds  are  usually  authorized 
in  the  ordinances  which  create  the  loan  funds.  The  installments  pro¬ 
vided  for  are  usually  (1)  one  per  cent  of  the  principal,  or  (2)  a  fixed  sum, 
or  (3)  a  sum  sufficient  to  “amortize”  the  debt  at  maturity.  The  “one 
per  cent”  installments  are  usually  insufficient  for  thirty  year  bonds; 
the  “fixed-sum”  installments  usually  have  no  scientific  relation  to  the 
needs  of  the  funds;  while  the  “amortization”  installments  leave  it  to 
the  Comptroller  to  calculate  the  sum  required. 

Premiums  received  from  the  sale  of  bonds  are  customarily  placed 
in  the  sinking  funds  established  to  redeem  them.  The  first  credit  to  a 
special  sinking  fund,  therefore,  is  the  premium;  later,  credits  are  made 
for  the  annual  installments,  income  from  investments  and  interest  on 
bank  balances. 


30 


Another  practice  which  should  be  mentioned  in  connection  with  the 
subject  of  sinking  fund  procedure  is  the  custom  of  creating  sinking 
funds  for  “serial”  bonds  as  well  as  for  the  regular  “sinking  fund”  bonds. 
In  the  case  of  serial  bonds,  the  serial  installment  is  put  into  the  sinking 
fund  and  taken  out  again  the  same  year.  This  is  done  because  the  debt 
service  item  “Redemption  of  bonds — direct  or  through  sinking  funds” 
is  expended  out  of  the  General  Fund  in  June  every  year,  and,  with  one 
or  two  exceptions,  the  serial  installments  are  not  immediately  due  in 
June.  To  carry  the  debt  installments  in  the  sinking  funds  rather  than 
in  the  General  Fund  results  in  a  slight  saving  of  interest  for  those  funds 
at  the  expense  of  the  General  Fund. 

If  at  the  maturity  of  any  bond  issue,  there  is  a  deficit  in  the  special 
sinking  fund  provided,  or  if  there  is  no  special  sinking  fund  for  redemp¬ 
tion,  three  courses  may  be  pursued: — 

(1)  The  bonds  may  be  paid  out  of  the  General  Sinking  Fund, 

(2)  They  may  be  paid  out  of  the  current  budget, 

(3)  They  may  be  refunded. 


PART  II 

HISTORY  OF  FINANCIAL  TRANSACTIONS 
FOR  LAST  THIRTEEN  YEARS 

Study  of  the  financial  transactions  of  the  city  during  the  last  thirteen 
years  involves  consideration,  first,  of  the  expenditures  for  various 
purposes,  and  second,  of  the  means  employed  for  financing  the 
expenditures. 

EXPENDITURES 

Expenditures  are  naturally  divided  into  two  classes — current  and 
capital.  As  was  explained  in  Part  I,  current  expenditures  are  made 
from  the  three  current  funds  which  come  under  budget  control  (the 
General  Fund  and  the  two  utility  funds),  and  also  to  some  extent  from 
the  Local  Improvement  Fund.  The  budget  expenditures  for  the  years 
1910  to  1922,  analyzed  according  to  organization  units,  are  set  forth  in 
Table  3.  The  total  of  $14,133,475.23  for  1922  is  an  increase  of  242  per 
cent  over  the  figure  of  $4,137,298.30  for  1910.  Reference  to  Table  4 
will  show  the  percentage  increases  for  the  most  important  organization 
units,  as  compared  with  this  aggregate  increase  of  242  per  cent. 

In  Table  5  the  yearly  budget  expenditures  are  analyzed  by  “objects’ ’ 
into  four  classes,  as  follows: — Debt  Service,  Personal  Service,  Other 
Current  Expense,  and  Acquisition  of  Property.  It  will  be  noted  that 
Personal  Service  comprises  over  fifty  per  cent  of  each  year’s  budget. 
Table  6  gives  the  percentage  increase  of  the  four  classes  of  expenditure 
during  the  thirteen  year  period.  The  expenditures  for  Debt  Service 
show  the  largest  percentage  increase.  These  expenditures  have  increased 
much  more  rapidly  than  the  aggregate  budget.  This  is  to  be  attributed  to 
the  fact  that  in  the  last  two  or  three  years  several  note  issues  have  been 
redeemed  out  of  the  budget  in  addition  to  the  regular  debt  service  items 
of  interest,  serial  installments,  and  sinking  fund  installments.  Personal 
Service  shows  a  slightly  greater  percentage  increase  than  the  budget 
aggregate,  while  Other  Current  Expenses  are  considerably  less. 

The  current  services  which  are  not  covered  by  the  budget  but  which 
are  cleared  through  the  Local  Improvement  Fund  are  as  follows  at  the 
present  time: — 

Snow  Removal  (or  sidewalk  snow  plowing). 

Extra  Lighting. 

Sprinkling. 

Care  and  Embellishment  and  Tree  Planting. 


32 


Prior  to  1920,  the  cost  of  street  cleaning  and  flushing  was  also  directly 
assessed  through  the  Local  Improvement  Fund,  but  these  services  are 
now  carried  by  the  General  Fund.  The  procedure  whereby  the  cost  of 
these  current  services  is  assessed  through  the  medium  of  the  tax  roll 
was  described  above  in  Part  I.  Prior  to  1918,  “Extra  Lighting”  was 
assessed  by  the  regular  local  improvement  assessment  procedure  rather 
than  by  the  tax-roll  procedure.  The  cost  of  these  services  for  each  of  the 
previous  thirteen  years  is  shown  in  Table  7.  The  “dates”  in  this  table 
refer  to  the  time  of  collection  (or  insertion  in  tax-roll)  and  the  actual 
expenditures  were  made  generally  a  year  earlier.  The  table  will  serve 
both  as  a  table  of  expenditures  and  as  a  table  of  assessments. 

Capital  expenditures  are  made  from  the  Local  Improvement  Fund 
or  from  the  various  loan  funds.  The  Local  Improvement  Fund  pro¬ 
vides  working  capital  for  the  construction  of  various  improvements, 
the  cost  of  which  is  to  be  directly  assessed  against  the  property  benefited. 
In  order  to  allocate  the  expenditures  from  this  fund  to  particular  years, 
it  is  necessary  to  fix  some  arbitrary  point  in  the  financial  process  of  con¬ 
struction  and  assessment  by  which  to  classify  the  individual  improve¬ 
ments.  The  point  used  as  a  basis  for  the  distribution  in  Table  8  is  the 
date  that  the  ordinances  were  certified  by  the  Comptroller  to  the  As¬ 
sessors.  In  addition  to  being  distributed  by  the  years  in  which  they 
were  certified,  the  improvements  are  classified  by  kind  as  follows: — 

Pavements. 

Sewers. 

Walks. 

Openings,  extensions,  widenings,  discontinuings,  gradings  and 

combinations. 

(Grading,  walks,  and  sewers). 

(Grading  and  walks). 

(Walks  and  sewers). 

(Grading  and  sewers). 

Removal  of  poles  and  lighting  (Current  expenses) . 

Miscellaneous. 

The  average  yearly  expenditures  for  local  improvements  of  all  kinds 
is  slightly  more  than  a  million  dollars. 

All  other  capital  expenditures,  with  the  exception  of  the  compara¬ 
tively  small  items  included  in  the  budget  for  “acquisition  of  property,” 
are  made  from  the  various  loan  funds.  These  expenditures  for  the  past 


33 


thirteen  years  are  classified  by  purpose  in  Table  9.  The  largest  outlays 
have  been  made  for  the  water  system,  for  schools,  for  parks  and  play¬ 
grounds,  for  a  sewage  disposal  system,  for  bridges  and  for  police  and  fire 
buildings. 

FINANCING  THE  EXPENDITURES 

Revenues 

The  principal  means  of  financing  the  current  expenditures  of  the 
budget  has  been  the  current  revenues.  Borrowing  for  current  expenses 
has  been  permitted  to  some  extent,  but  up  to  the  present  time  this  has 
not  materially  influenced  the  customary  practice  of  financing  the  budget 
from  these  three  sources  of  revenue: — 

(1)  Tax  revenue. 

(2)  Utility  revenue. 

(3)  Miscellaneous  revenue. 

The  sums  derived  from  these  sources  of  revenue  during  the  last  thirteen 
years  are  set  forth  in  Table  10. 

Of  these  the  most  important  is  the  revenue  derived  from  the  city 
tax  levy,  since  it  comprises  about  five-sevenths  of  the  total  revenue.  The 
general  city  tax  was  levied  on  a  total  assessed  valuation  in  1922  of 
$359,784,448.00.  The  assessed  valuations  used  from  1905  to  date, 
together  with  the  constituent  elements  that  go  to  make  up  the  totals, 
appear  in  Table  1 1.  Real  estate  is  by  far  the  largest  element  of  assessed 
property;  special  franchises  are  next  in  importance.  Since  1918,  when 
most  personalty  was  exempted  from  property  taxation  to  make  way 
for  the  state  income  tax,  the  element  of  assessed  personal  property  has 
been  negligible.  The  separate  but  negligible  class  called  “ Pension” 
means  property  purchased  with  pension  money  and  which  is  subject 
to  a  smaller  tax  levy  to  cover  the  cost  of  schools  and  highways  only. 

The  relation  of  the  total  assessed  valuations  to  the  estimated  full 
valuations,  and  the  equalization  rates  used  by  the  State  Tax  Commission, 
are  shown  in  Table  12. 

It  will  be  remembered  that  in  the  thirteen  years  from  1910  to  1922 
inclusive,  the  budget  increased  242  per  cent.  Similarly  the  tax  levy,  as 
shown  in  Table  10,  also  more  than  tripled  in  the  same  period  of  time.  But 
the  total  assessed  valuations,  on  which  the  levies  are  based,  have  increased 
considerably  less  than  this.  Hence  it  would  seem  inevitable  that  the 


34 


tax  rate  should  have 

increased.  That  such 

was  actually  the  case  is 

evident  from  an  inspection  of  the  yearly  rates, 

which  are  as  follows: — 

Year 

City  Rate 

City  Rate  Pension* 

1910 

19.32 

7-55 

1 9 1 1 

18.96 

7-53 

1912 

19.52 

7-53 

1913 

19-34 

7.42 

I9I4 

19-75 

7-74 

1915 

19-73 

7.87 

1916 

20. 69 

8-54 

1917 

18. 89 

8-45 

1918 

21.67 

9.98 

1919 

24 . 06 

i°-35 

1920 

23.24 

9. 28 

1921 

22.881 

11.03 

1922 

29 . 48 

T4  •  59 

1923 

28 . 444 

T3  •  79 

*Property  purchased  with  pension  money  is  exempted  from  the 
full  city  tax  rate,  it  being  subject  to  a  special  rate  based  on  the  cost  of 
schools  and  highways. 

Tax  Rate  and  Tax  Limit 

How  does  this  tax  rate  compare  with  the  tax  limit  laid  down  in 
the  state  constitution?  The  paragraph  of  the  constitution  in  question 
reads  as  follows: — 

“The  amount  hereafter  to  be  raised  by  tax  for  county  or  city  pur¬ 
poses,  in  any  county  containing  a  city  of  over  one  hundred  thousand 
inhabitants,  or  any  such  city  of  this  state,  in  addition  to  providing  for 
the  principal  and  interest  of  the  existing  debt,  shall  not  in  the  aggregate 
exceed  in  any  one  year  two  per  centum  of  the  assessed  valuation  of  the 
real  and  personal  estate  of  such  county  or  city,  to  be  ascertained  as 
prescribed  in  this  section  in  respect  to  county  or  city  debt — (i.  e.  ‘as  it 
appeared  by  the  assessment  rolls  of  said  county  or  city  on  the  last  assess¬ 
ment  for  state  or  county  taxes’)-’’  (Art.  VIII,  Section  io  in  part.) 

It  will  be  seen  from  the  foregoing  that  the  tax  limitation  does  not 
apply  to  the  complete  tax  levy,  but  to  that  part  of  it  covering  general 
municipal  expense.  In  other  words,  a  tax  levy  for  debt  is  unlimited, 
while  a  levy  for  general  municipal  expense  is  limited  to  two  per  cent  of 


35 


the  assessed  valuation  of  the  previous  year.  In  Table  13  the  total  tax 
levies  are  divided  into  these  two  parts,  so  that  it  is  possible  to  calculate 
the  ratio  of  the  general  municipal  expense  levy  to  the  assessment  of  the 
previous  year.  The  last  column  of  this  table  gives  the  percentage  ratios 
for  the  last  eleven  years  and  it  is  obvious  that,  for  this  period  of  time  at 
least,  the  city  has  been  right  up  to  the  tax  limit. 

It  should  be  remembered  that  these  tax  limit  ratios  are  purely  tech¬ 
nical  and  that,  practically  speaking,  “tax  limits  do  not  limit.”  This  is 
because  the  financing  of  the  budget  expenditures  does  not  rely  entirely 
upon  the  tax  levy,  but  also  upon  borrowing.  This  point  is  discussed 
more  fully  in  Part  IV  of  this  report. 

Miscellaneous  Revenues 

After  tax  revenue,  the  most  important  single  source  of  revenue  is 
the  revenue  from  the  utilities.  The  market  revenues  consist  of  stall 
rents  mainly  and  are  the  resource  of  the  market  fund.  They  are  negligible 
in  amount,  as  the  total  budget  for  the  market  is  less  than  $15,000.00.  Water 
levenues  consist  for  the  larger  part  of  “meter  rates.”  To  these  are  added 
several  smaller  items  such  as  Water  Frontage  Tax,  Sale  of  Meters, 
Interest,  etc.  The  1922  revenue  of  the  Water  Fund  was  distributed 


as  follows: — 

Meter  Rates .  $1,015,178.73 

Frontage  Tax .  15,006.54 

Sales  of  Meters,  Taps,  etc .  28,941.00 

Interest  and  Penalties  on  Water  Rates —  3,144.63 

Interest  on  Bank  Balances .  2,894. 11 

Water  Used  by  City  Departments .  147,007.88 

Total .  $1,212,172.89 


All  other  miscellaneous  revenues  (i.e.,  excluding  the  utility  revenues) 
yield  at  the  present  time  approximately  $2,800,000.00.  The  classification 
of  these  revenues  and  the  amounts  collected  during  the  last  thirteen  years 
are  shown  in  detail  in  Table  14.  This  table  includes  the  utility  revenues 
as  well  as  those  applicable  only  to  the  general  fund.  Several  items  of 
minor  importance  such  as  licenses  for  junk  dealers,  pawnbrokers  and 
theatres,  and  fines  and  forfeitures  are  not  shown  in  the  table  because  the 
charter  applies  these  revenues  to  the  Police  and  Fire  Pension  Funds,  and 
on  the  books  of  the  city  they  are  entered  directly  to  the  credit  of  these 
funds  rather  than  indirectly  (in  and  out)  through  the  Miscellaneous 


36 


Revenues  account  of  the  General  Fund.  While  the  tax  revenues  have 
increased  approximately  230  per  cent  during  the  last  thirteen  years,  it 
appears  from  an  inspection  of  the  totals  in  this  table  that  utility  revenues 
have  increased  approximately  100  per  cent  and  other  miscellaneous 
revenues  approximately  475  per  cent.  It  should  also  be  pointed  out  in 
connection  with  this  table  that  the  large  item  of  liquor  license  receipts  has 
been  replaced  in  recent  years  by  the  city’s  share  of  the  state  income  tax, 
personal  and  corporate. 

Assessments 

Direct  assessments  for  current  services  correspond  with  the  expendi¬ 
tures  for  current  services  as  set  forth  in  Table  7. 

Unlike  the  assessments  for  current  services,  the  assessments  for 
local  improvements  are  levied  and  collected  according  to  the  local  assess¬ 
ment  procedure  outlined  in  Part  I  of  this  report.  In  Table  8  the  cost 
of  the  local  improvements  certified  in  the  last  ten  years  is  analyzed 
according  to  the  kind  of  improvement  for  which  the  expenditures  were 
made.  The  total  yearly  costs  there  presented  are  further  analyzed 
in  Table  15  according  to  the  distribution  of  the  charges  as  between  the 
City  of  Rochester,  the  New  York  State  Railways,  all  other  property 
owners,  and  total.  The  charges  against  the  City  of  Rochester  are  divided 
into  two  parts — one  representing  the  charges  against  the  city  at  large 
and  the  other  the  charges  against  city  owned  parcels  of  property.  The 
charges  against  the  city  at  large  in  1913  and  1922  are  unduly  large 
because  there  are  included  ordinances  for  the  Central  Avenue  bridge 
(1913)  and  for  deepening  the  Genesee  River  (1922).  On  these  ordinances 
the  whole  or  a  large  part  of  the  cost  was  assessed  against  the  city  at  large. 
The  charges  against  the  New  York  State  Railways  are  for  the  propor¬ 
tionate  share  of  paving  costs  on  streets  in  which  car  tracks  are  located. 
During  the  years  1917  to  1920,  inclusive,  the  Railway  Company  con¬ 
structed  the  pavements  itself. 

In  addition  to  its  share  of  the  regular  local  ordinances,  the  city  has 
to  bear  every  fifth  year  its  share  of  the  East  Side  Trunk  Sewer  assessment. 
It  must  also  bear  its  share  of  the  cost  of  the  current  services  added  to 
the  tax  rolls  every  year.  A  summary  of  these  various  charges  against 
the  city  is  given  in  Table  16. 

It  was  explained  above  in  Part  I  that  assessments  against  the  city 
were  regarded  as  being  payable  in  one  installment,  but  that  no  penalty 
was  imposed  for  non-payment  The  city’s  $hare  of  the  East  Side  Trunk 


37 


Sewer  assessments  and  the  additions  to  the  tax  roll  have  been  currently 
taken  care  of,  but  most  of  the  city’s  share  of  the  regular  local  ordinances 
was  delinquent  until  early  in  1922,  when  a  bond  issue  of  $1,750,000  was 
floated  to  clear  up  the  delinquency  and  reimburse  the  local  improvement 

fund. 

Borrowing 

After  current  revenues  and  assessments,  there  remains  to  be  con¬ 
sidered  a  third  method  of  financing  the  expenditures  of  the  city,  namely, 
borrowing.  The  description  of  the  borrowing  procedure  in  Part  I  includ¬ 
ed  an  enumeration  of  the  various  purposes  for  which  money  might  be 
borrowed.  The  proceeds  of  borrowing  from  1910  to  1922  are  shown  in 
summary  form  in  Table  17  and  in  more  detailed  form  in  Table  18. 

It  was  explained  in  Part  I  of  this  report  that  most  of  the  city’s 
borrowing  takes  the  form  originally  of  note  issues  and  is  later  converted 
into  the  form  of  bonds.  A  summary  of  the  note  transactions  that  have 
taken  place  from  1910  to  1922  is  presented  in  the  following  statement: — 

Balance  outstanding  January  1,  1910 .  $  2,614,000.00 

New  Notes  issued  1910-1922 . . .  57,374,045.75 

Total  Notes  Issued .  $59,988,045 . 75 

Notes  paid  from  Current 

Revenues .  $30,861,045.75 

Notes  Funded .  23,202,000.00  54,063,045.75 

Balance  outstanding  December  31,  1922 .  $5,925,000.00 

The  transactions  thus  summarized  are  further  amplified  by  years  and 
by  purpose  in  Tables  19  and  20. 

Referring  to  Table  20,  it  is  shown  that  during  the  thirteen  year 
period  new  notes  were  issued  (exclusive  of  Revenue  Anticipation  Notes) 
to  the  amount  of  $31,971,545.75.  Of  this  amount  $5,458,545.75  was 
liquidated  out  of  current  revenues  or  assessments.  By  far  the  largest 
portion  of  the  note  issues  was  funded  into  bonds.  On  December  31, 
1922,  the  notes  outstanding  which  had  not  yet  been  funded  or  otherwise 
liquidated  amounted  to  $5,925,000.00. 

It  is  evident  that  the  issue  of  notes  and  the  issue  of  bonds  are  very 
closely  tied  up  together,  the  notes  being  issued  first  and  the  bonds  later 
in  order  to  save  interest.  The  bond  issues  are  summarized  by  years 
in  Table  21  and  are  given  in  detail  by  purpose  in  Table  22.  The  individ- 


38 


ual  issues  are  set  over  against  the  notes  that  were  funded.  It  should 
be  noted,  however,  that  in  1912,  1913,  1914,  1921  and  1922,  there 
were  several  cases  in  which  the  proceeds  of  the  bond  issues  were  used 
directly  for  construction  or  for  bond  refunding.  These  cases  are  excep¬ 
tions  to  the  customary  procedure. 

Debt  Limit 

The  question  naturally  arises,  to  what  extent  has  the  city  approached 
its  debt  limit?  The  city’s  debt  limit  is  laid  down  in  Article  VIII,  section 
ten  of  the  state  constitution.  It  is  as  follows: — 

“No  county  or  city  shall  be  allowed  to  become  indebted  for  any 
purpose  or  in  any  manner  to  an  amount  which,  including  existing  indebt¬ 
edness,  shall  exceed  ten  per  centum  of  the  assessed  valuation  of  the  real 
estate  of  such  county  or  city  on  the  last  assessment  for  state  or  county 
taxes  prior  to  the  incurring  of  such  indebtedness;  and  all  indebtedness 
in  excess  of  such  limitation  except  such  as  now  may  exist,  shall  be  abso¬ 
lutely  void,  except  as  herein  otherwise  provided.  No  county  or  city 
whose  present  indebtedness  exceeds  ten  per  centum  of  the  assessed 
valuation  of  its  real  estate  subject  to  taxation,  shall  be  allowed  to  become 
indebted  in  any  further  amount  until  such  indebtedness  shall  be  reduced 
within  such  limit.  This  section  shall  not  be  construed  to  prevent  the 
issuing  of  certificates  of  indebtedness  or  revenue  bonds  issued  in  anticipa¬ 
tion  of  the  collection  of  taxes  for  amounts  actually  contained  or  to  be 
contained  in  the  taxes  for  the  year  when  such  certificates  or  revenue 
bonds  are  issued  and  payable  out  of  such  taxes.  Nor  shall  this  section 
be  construed  to  prevent  the  issue  of  bonds  to  provide  for  the  supply  of 
water;  but  the  term  of  the  bonds  issued  to  provide  for  the  supply  of 
water,  in  excess  of  the  limitation  of  indebtedness  fixed  herein,  shall  not 
exceed  twenty  years,  and  a  sinking  fund  shall  be  created  on  the  issuing 
of  the  said  bonds  for  their  redemption,  by  raising  annually  a  sum  which 
will  produce  an  amount  equal  to  the  sum  of  the  principal  and  interest 
of  said  bonds  at  their  maturity.  All  certificates  of  indebtedness  or 
revenue  bonds  issued  in  anticipation  of  the  collection  of  taxes  which 
are  not  retired  within  five  years  after  their  date  of  issue,  and  bonds 
issued  to  provide  for  the  supply  of  water,  and  any  debt  hereafter  incurred 
by  any  portion  or  part  of  a  city,  if  there  shall  be  any  such  debt,  shall  be 
included  in  ascertaining  the  power  of  the  city  to  become  otherwise 
indebted;  except  that  debts  incurred  by  any  city  of  the  first  class  after 
the  first  day  of  January,  nineteen  hundred  and  four,  to  provide  for  the 
supply  of  water  shall  not  be  so  included.” 


39 


What  specific  liabilities  are  included  in  the  term  “existing 
indebtedness,”  and  what  exemptions  are  allowed  have  been  thor¬ 
oughly  construed  by  the  courts.  As  far  as  Rochester  is  concerned,  the 
gross  debt  includes  all  of  the  bond  and  note  indebtedness;  the  exemptions 
are  two:  (i)  the  assets  of  sinking  funds  which  are  applicable  to  included 
debt,  and  (2)  water  indebtedness  incurred  after  1904.  The  exemption 
of  water  debt  issued  after  1904  was  made  applicable  to  Rochester  (to 
“any  city  of  the  first  class”)  by  a  constitutional  amendment  in  1917. 

Table  23,  which  analyses  the  debt  statements  for  the  last  twenty- 
three  years,  reveals  the  fact  that  Rochester  was  practically  up  to  its  debt 
limit  continuously  until  1917,  when  the  aforementioned  water  exemption 
was  granted.  This  added  five  million  to  the  total  exemption.  At  the 
present  time  (December  31,  1922)  the  city  is  $3,424,000.00  under  the  limit. 

Debt  Redemption 

Maturing  indebtedness  has  been  taken  care  of  in  various  ways, 
some  of  the  temporary  notes  being  paid  out  of  current  revenues,  and  the 
long-term  bonds  being  either  redeemed  out  of  sinking  funds  or  refunded. 
Serial  bonds  have  of  course  been  paid  periodically,  sometimes  directly 
out  of  the  budget,  but  mostly  through  the  sinking  funds.  There  is  no 
regularity  of  practice  with  respect  to  whether  or  not  serial  payments 
shall  be  made  out  of  sinking  funds.  Therefore,  Table  24,  which  shows 
the  various  payments  out  of  the  sinking  funds  from  1910  to  1922  inclu¬ 
sive,  is  not  a  complete  history  of  all  bond  payments. 

Table  24  also  shows  that  all  the  sinking  funds  together  received 
aggregate  additions,  from  1910  to  1922,  of  $4,884,008.75.  Some¬ 
what  more  than  half  of  this  amount  (or  $2,734,869.98)  was  received 
from  the  tax  levy,  either  in  the  form  of  serial  or  sinking  fund  install¬ 
ments  out  of  the  budget  or  else  in  the  form  of  fund  surpluses.  The 
summary  debt  service  payments  out  of  the  last  thirteen  budgets  are 
presented  in  Table  25.  The  figures  there  given  include  both  the  interest 
payments  and  the  redemption  payments.  Separate  analyses  of  the 
general  debt  service,  water  debt  service,  and  public  market  debt  service 
are  given  in  Tables  26,  27  and  28. 

The  only  public  market  debt  payments  made  out  of  the  budget  are 
for  interest  on  market  bonds.  Contributions  to  the  Market  Sinking 
Fund  consist,  by  charter  requirement,  of  the  annual  Market  Fund 
surplus  balances.  As  the  market  bonds  have  recently  been  retired,  the 
Market  Sinking  Fund  is  no  longer  required.  While  the  Market  Fund 


40 


surpluses  have  been  transferred  regularly,  the  Water  and  General  Fund 
surpluses  have  been  transferred  sporadically.  The  practice  with  respect 
to  the  General  Fund  surpluses  is  to  transfer  old  surpluses  whenever  the 
General  Sinking  Fund  has  to  have  resources  with  which  to  meet  its 
obligations.  The  transfers  have  been  as  follows  during  the  last  thirteen 
years : 


1910  .  $162,219.06 

1911  .  74,292.27 

1913 . 23,530.74 

i9G .  340.19 

1919  .  50,000.00 

1920  .  89,868.33 

1921  .  10,000.00 

1922  .  100,000.00 


The  irregular  character  of  the  sinking  fund  transactions  is  due  largely 
to  the  fact  that  the  charter  sets  up  the  sinking  funds  on  an  unscientific 
basis.  An  analysis  of  the  present  sinking  fund  condition  and  a  study 
of  what  is  necessary  to  put  the  funds  on  a  scientific  basis  and  to  make  them 
adequate  for  their  purpose  is  presented  in  Part  III  and  Part  IV  of  this 
report. 


PART  III 


FINANCIAL  CONDITION  OF  THE  CITY  AT  THE 

PRESENT  TIME 

In  studying  the  financial  condition  of  the  city  it  is  not  necessary, 
as  in  the  case  of  a  private  business,  to  present  a  balance  sheet  of  assets 
and  liabilities.  The  city’s  obligations  are  not  liens  against  the  material 
assets  of  the  city  nor  does  its  solvency  depend  upon  the  ability  to  show 
a  surplus.  On  the  other  hand,  a  city’s  financial  condition  is  tested  by 
the  service  it  is  rendering  and  the  means  it  has  at  hand  for  financing 
the  cost  of  such  service.  Such  a  test  involves  a  study  of  the  tax  and  debt 
limits  at  the  present  time  and  the  mortgaging  of  the  same  for  future 
years. 

Without  going  into  an  appraisal  of  the  cost  of  the  various  functions 
performed  by  the  city,  an  attempt  will  be  made  in  this  part  of  the  report 
to  outline  the  immediate  demands  upon  the  city  in  the  coming  year  and 
to  discuss  briefly  the  various  means  that  may  be  used  to  finance  these 
demands.  As  explained  previously,  the  three  main  sources  of  funds  are 
revenues,  assessments  and  borrowing. 

GROWING  EXPENDITURES 

It  will  be  remembered  that  the  city  budget  increased  242  per  cent 
from  1910  to  1922.  The  total  budget  expenditure  for  1922  is 
$14,133,475.23  as  compared  with  expenditures  of  $12,888,777.93  for  1921. 
Beginning  with  the  year  1918,  the  budget  has  increased  more  than  $1,000, - 
000  each  year.  The  year  1921  is  an  exception  as  the  increase  amounted  to 
more  than  $2,000,000.  This  is  attributable  to  the  fact  that  the  salaries  of 
city  employees  were  increased  in  that  year.  In  1920,  for  the  first  time, 
it  was  contemplated  that  borrowing  should  constitute  one  of  the  main 
resources  of  the  budget  and  this  part  of  the  plan  did  not  appear  in  the 
“spring  budget”  nor  were  appropriations  passed  for  the  full  contemplated 
expenditures  of  the  Department  of  Public  Instruction.  The  budget 
program  actually  contemplated  expenditures  of  at  least  $800,000.00 
more  than  appears  in  the  budget  appropriation.  This  plan  has  continued 
ever  since  with  a  notable  increase  in  the  borrowings  during  the  last  two 
years.  It  is  evident  that  expenditures  are  growing  apace  and  that 
provision  must  be  made  for  even  much  larger  current  expenses. 


42 


Expenditures  for  Schools 

Much  of  the  responsibility  for  this  condition  must  be  laid  at  the  door 
of  the  schools,  for  educational  costs  the  last  few  years  have  grown  out 
of  all  proportion  to  the  costs  of  the  other  departments  of  government. 
By  charter  provision  and  by  state  law  the  administration  of  the  schools 
has  been  separated  from  the  general  city  administration  and  is  largely 
uncontrolled  by  the  central  financial  officers  of  the  city. 

The  1920  education  statute,  popularly  known  as  the  Lockwood 
Law,  sets  certain  minimum  salary  requirements  for  all  teachers  in  the 
state,  which  are  substantial  increases  over  the  prevailing  rates  paid 
in  the-  various  cities.  The  increased  salary  cost,  made  necessary  by 
this  law,  is  largely  offset,  however,  by  the  granting  of  state  aid.  This 
aid  takes  the  form  of  a  quota,  which  varies  according  to  the  size  of  the 
city  and  which  depends  upon  compliance  with  the  law  in  other  respects. 
For  Rochester,  the  state  quota  is  $550  per  teacher.  The  state  aid  money 
is  secured  by  a  direct  tax  levy. 

Although  capital  expenditures  were  curtailed  during  and  immediately 
following  the  war  period,  owing  to  the  high  cost,  the  inevitable  resump¬ 
tion  of  capital  projects  has  taken  place.  In  1920  no  bonds  were  sold 
because  there  was  no  market  for  them  at  a  reasonable  rate  of  interest. 
In  1921  and  1922  bonds  aggregating  $11,116,000  were  issued  to  fund 
outstanding  notes  and  to  provide  working  capital  for  new  projects. 

The  immediate  future,  therefore,  does  not  give  promise  of  reduced 
expenditures,  whether  out  of  current  funds  or  out  of  assessment  or  loan 
funds.  Lower  unit  costs,  if  they  occur,  will  likely  be  more  than  offset 
by  increasing  quantitv  of  service  and  improvements.  The  net  result 
will  likely  be  increased  total  expenditures  in  every  line  of  municipal 
activity. 

CONDITION  OF  THE  REVENUES 

To  meet  the  inevitable  increases  in  expenditures,  what  is  the  condi¬ 
tion  of  the  city’s  revenues?  How  expansible  are  the  tax  revenues,  utility 
revenues,  and  miscellaneous  revenues? 

Increasing  Assessed  Valuations 

The  productiveness  of  the  general  city  tax  involves  two  considera¬ 
tions — first,  the  assessment  “base”  on  which  the  tax  is  levied,  and 
second,  the  tax  rate  allowed  under  the  tax  limit  provision  of  the 
constitution.  Obviously,  the  yield  of  a  certain  tax  rate  is  directly  pro- 


43 


portional  to  the  assessed  valuations,  and  if  the  assessments  are  raised 
a  given  percentage  the  total  levy  can  be  increased  by  the  same  percentage 
without  changing  the  rate.  The  assessed  valuation  of  Rochester  prop¬ 
erty  has  been  equalized  as  being  about  88  per  cent  of  full  value.  If  this 
percentage  is  fairly  accurate,  it  is  evident  that  there  is  a  considerable 
margin  for  an  increase  in  assessed  valuations  toward  the  ioo  per  cent 
mark.  A  general  increase  in  the  level  of  assessments  was  made  in  1921 
by  the  Board  of  Assessment  and  Taxation,  to  the  extent  of  approximately 
20  per  cent.  This  move  brought  assessed  valuations  considerably  closer  to 
the  actual  values  (figuring  the  actual  values  on  a  permanent  basis  and 
not  taking  advantage  of  temporary  inflation)  and  also  provided  a  sub¬ 
stantial  increase  in  tax  revenue.  In  spite  of  this  increase,  additional 
revenue  was  not  sufficient  to  meet  the  increase  in  current  operation  costs. 
A  normal  annual  increase  in  valuations  is  to  be  expected  but  it  is  not  prob¬ 
able  that  this  will  ever  be  sufficient  to  offset  the  increases  in  operation 
costs. 

If  increasing  the  assessments  will  not  yield  an  immediate  increase 
in  revenues,  can  such  a  result  be  secured  by  increasing  the  ‘‘unlimited' 1 
or  “exempt”  part  of  the  tax  rate?  The  tax  limit  applies  to  a  levy  for 
“city  purposes”  and  exempts  from  the  limitations  the  items  for  debt 
service.  Thus  the  tax  levy  in  Rochester  has  customarily  been  divided 
into  two  parts: — one,  “unlimited,”  to  cover  whatever  was  required  for 
general  fund  debt  service  (i.  e.  interest  on  general  notes  and  bonds  and 
redemption  of  same  whether  direct  or  through  sinking  funds) ;  the  other, 
“limited,”  being  the  remainder  of  the  budget  minus  the  estimated  mis¬ 
cellaneous  revenues.  The  only  way  in  which  the  total  levy  can  be  ma¬ 
terially  increased  is  to  enlarge  the  “unlimited”  part  of  the  levy.-  This 
may  be  done  either  by  increasing  the  debt  service  or  by  defining  certain 
functions  of  the  city  so  as  to  exclude  them  from  the  term  “city  purposes." 
The  former  method  has  been  used  to  a  considerable  extent  in  many  of  the 
cities  of  the  state;  the  latter  method  has  been  the  subject  of  court  action 
in  Rochester  and  “city  purposes”  has  been  defined.  As  a  result  of  the 
court  adjudication  the  city  can  despair  of  any  relief  by  excluding  certain 
functions  from  “city  purposes.” 

Borrowing  for  Current  Expenses 

The  expedient  of  borrowing  for  part  of  the  current  expenses  of  one 
year  and  taking  care  of  such  temporary  indebtedness  in  the  debt  service 
(unlimited)  item  of  the  following  year’s  budget  is  an  effective  way  of 


44 


getting  around  the  tax  limit,  while  technically  it  does  not  violate  the 
letter  of  the  constitutional  mandate.  This  practice  has  not  been  neces¬ 
sary  in  Rochester  until  the  last  four  years.  In  1919,  $250,000.00  of  the 
school  expenditures  were  taken  care  of  by  selling  School  Repair  and 
Equipment  notes;  these  notes  were  liquidated  out  of  the  1920  tax  levy. 
In  1920,  $900,000.00  was  borrowed,  in  1921,  $2,129,000.00  and  in  1922, 
$1,940,000.00,  and  in  each  of  these  cases  the  notes  were  paid  off  in  the 
following  year.  It  appears  as  though  this  practice  would  have  to  be 
resorted  to  indefinitely  unless  relief  of  some  kind  is  forthcoming. 

Utility  Revenues 

It  is  axiomatic  that  the  rates  charged  by  municipal  utilities  should 
be  sufficient  completely  to  cover  all  costs  of  operating  the  utilities.  In 
other  words,  utility  revenues  should  be  applied  as  the  resources  of  special 
utility  funds  and  it  should  not  be  necessary  to  subsidize  these  funds 
from  tax  revenues. 

The  Public  Market  seems  to  be  paying  its  way.  But  the  same  cannot 
be  said  of  the  Water  Works,  the  city’s  single  important  utility.  Although 
material  increases  in  the  water  rates  were  made  in  1921,  which  should 
provide  sufficient  money  to  make  the  utility  self-supporting,  such  a  condi¬ 
tion  is  precluded  by  work  performed  for  other  departments  and  rebates 
to  “charitable  institutions”  for  which  the  Water  Bureau  is  not  reimbursed. 

Miscellaneous  Revenues 

Miscellaneous  revenues  have  been  increased  in  recent  years  because 
several  of  the  most  important  items  are  new  or  have  been  changed  by 
legislative  enactment.  For  example,  the  city  received  an  allotted  share 
of  the  state  personal  income  tax  for  the  third  time  in  1922;  and  a  share  of 
the  corporation  income  tax  for  the  fifth  time.  The  quota  from  the  state 
for  education  has  been  much  enlarged  in  compliance  with  the  1920  law; 
but  such  quota  has  been  entirely  offset  by  mandatory  salary  increases. 
The  return  from  the  city’s  share  of  the  state  corporation  income  tax 
has  also  increased  considerably. 

A  good  many  of  the  license  fees  as  well  as  fines  and  fees  of  other  kinds 
are  fixed  by  state  law  and  are  not  subject  to  municipal  adjustment. 
Much  of  the  return  from  miscellaneous  sales  is  dependent  on  market 
conditions  and  cannot  be  arbitrarily  increased.  On  the  other  hand, 
many  of  the  license  fees  are  fixed  locally  and  are  capable  of  adjustment. 
Most  of  them  have  not  been  changed  for  many  years.  Moreover,  many 
businesses  and  privileges  are  carried  on  for  which  no  fees  are  now  charged 


45 


and  from  which  a  considerable  revenue  might  well  be  derived.  A  fuller 
discussion  of  the  license  and  permit  question  is  presented  in  Part  IV  of 
this  report. 

CONDITION  OF  ASSESSMENTS 

Direct  assessments  provide  an  adequate  means  of  financing  local 
improvements.  No  specific  constitutional,  statutory  or  charter  limita-. 
tion  restricts  the  amount  of  money  that  may  be  raised  by  this  means,  pro¬ 
vided  always  that  it  is  to  be  used  for  defraying  the  cost  of  special  improve¬ 
ments  from  which  the  contributing  property  owners  derive  a  special 
benefit.  The  city  is  free,  therefore,  to  proceed  with  a  local  improvement 
program  as  dictated  by  the  needs  of  the  city  and  subject  only  to  the 
restraint  of  public  opinion  and  the  constitutional  debt  limit. 

The  city  is  not  cumbered  with  the  problem  of  collecting  delinquent 
assessments  from  property  owners.  The  procedure  for  adding  such 
delinquent  accounts  to  the  annual  taxes  was  explained  above  in  Part  I. 
As  previously  stated,  charges  against  the  city  are  not  subject  to  the  same 
penalties  and  procedure  as  charges  against  private  owners.  It  is  a 
situation  for  concern  that  the  public  indebtedness  to  the  Local  Improve¬ 
ment  Fund  for  delinquent  local  charges  is  accumulating  again  in  large 
proportions.  Approximately  $400,000  has  been  added  since  the  bond 
issue  in  January,  1922,  and  to  this  may  be  added  $568,000  for  the  city’s 
share  of  the  Clarissa  Street  bridge  project  which  has  been  completed,  but 
not  certified. 

INDEBTEDNESS  CONDITION 

Table  29  gives  an  analysis  of  the  city’s  bonds  outstanding  as  of 
December  31,  1922.  The  total  bonded  indebtedness  is  there  shown  to  be 
$35,7 19> 795-°°*  At  the  same  date,  temporary  notes  were  outstanding  to 
the  amount  of  $5,925,000.00,  making  a  total  outstanding  indebtedness  of 
$41,644,795.00.  The  note  indebtedness  outstanding  at  the  end  of  the 
year  1922  is  classified  in  Table  30.  The  problem  of  the  immediate  future 
with  respect  to  borrowing  has  to  do  with  the  disposition  of  this  large 
outstanding  note  indebtedness.  A  program  for  funding  a  large  part  of 
it  is  now  pending. 

While  the  total  indebtedness  is  sufficiently  under  the  debt  limit, 
indications  are  that  this  condition  will  not  maintain  very  long.  With 
large  projects  and  with  local  improvements  increasing  rapidly,  the  debt 
problem  promises  to  become  more  and  more  acute  in  the  immediate 


46 


future.  Unless  some  definite  program  of  improvements  is  adopted  which 
will  take  cognizance  of  the  financial  means,  the  city  may  find  itself  in  an 
embarrassing  financial  situation. 

Sinking  Funds 

The  condition  of  the  sinking  funds  is  decidedly  unsatisfactory 
because  of  the  unscientific  manner  in  which  they  were  created.  The 
balances  of  the  various  sinking  funds  as  of  December  31,  1922,  are  shown 
in  Tables  31,  32,  33  and  34.  Attention  is  called  to  the  General 
Sinking  Fund  and  the  Water  Sinking  Fund.  It  will  be  remembered  that 
the  charter  provides  that  the  surpluses  of  the  general  fund  shall  be 
periodically  transferred  to  the  general  sinking  fund  and  that  the  surpluses 
of  the  water  fund  shall  be  transferred  to  the  water  sinking  fund.  These 
surpluses  comprise  the  main  resources  of  these  two  charter  sinking 
funds.  For  reasons  explained  previously  the  charter  provisions  requiring 
a  transfer  of  these  surpluses  have  not  been  enforced.  It  has  been  the 
practice  for  the  city  to  transfer  an  amount  from  the  surplus  account  to 
the  sinking  fund  account  only  when  funds  were  actually  needed  to  take 
care  of  some  maturing  bond  issue.  For  example,  an  amount  of 
$100,000.00  was  transferred  from  the  general  surplus  account  to  the 
general  sinking  fund  on  August  30,  1922,  in  order  to  provide  funds  for  the 
redemption  of  an  issue  of  bridge  bonds  maturing  September  1,  1922. 
There  still  remains,  however,  in  the  general  surplus  account  a  balance  of 
$57 1  >655.92  which  technically  belongs  to  the  general  sinking  fund,  but 
which  actually  has  not  been  transferred.  The  yearly  surplus  balances 
for  the  last  thirteen  years  which  go  to  make  up  this  total  balance  of 
S5 7 1 ,655.92  are  as  follows  at  the  present  time: — 


1910  . Closed  out  to  General  Fund 

1911  . Closed  out  to  General  Fund 

1912  . Closed  out  to  General  Fund 

1913  . Closed  out  to  General  Fund 

1914  . Closed  out  to  General  Fund 

1915  . Closed  out  to  General  Fund 

1916  . Closed  out  to  General  Fund 

1917  .  $  22,864.64 

1918  .  70,227.11 

1919  .  60,410.85 

1920  .  46,976.29 

1921  .  84,205.12 

1922  .  286,971.91 


Total . $571,655.92 


47 


The  water  fund  surpluses  have  accumulated  in  a  similar  manner 
and  present  a  total  amount  of  $206,169.53,  which  still  remains  in  the 
surplus  account  and  has  not  been  transferred  to  the  water  sinking  fund 
according  to  the  charter  mandate.  As  it  is  impossible  to  know  just  how 
much  or  when  these  surpluses  will  be  transferred,  they  have  not  been 
included  in  the  tables  purporting  to  show  the  balances  of  the  various 
sinking  funds. 

In  considering  the  question  of  deficits  in  the  various  sinking  funds, 
it  is  comparatively  easy  to  calculate  the  deficits  for  those  special  sinking 
funds  to  which  a  definite  calculable  installment  is  transferred  every 
year.  But  with  respect  to  the  water  sinking  fund  and  the  general  sinking 
fund,  it  is  difficult  to  estimate  the  deficits  because  of  the  erratic  character 
of  their  resources.  An  estimate  has  been  made,  however,  of  the  assets 
of  the  special  sinking  funds  at  the  maturity  of  the  bonds  which  they 
were  set  up  to  amortize.  In  most  every  case,  the  estimated  assets  will 
be  inadequate  completely  to  amortize  the  respective  bond  issues  and 
deficits  will  result.  These  estimated  deficits  are  shown  in  Table  35. 

The  charter  states  that  the  deficit  resulting  in  any  special  sinking 
fund  at  the  time  of  maturity  shall  be  made  up  out  of  the  general  sinking 
fund  or  the  water  sinking  fund  (depending  upon  whether  the  bonds 
are  general  bonds  or  water  bonds).  The  estimated  deficits  listed  in 
Table  35  amount  in  total  to  approximately  $1,846,000.00.  This  amount, 
therefore,  is  a  legal  charge  against  the  two  charter  sinking  funds;  not 
only  must  the  two  charter  sinking  funds  take  care  of  these  estimated 
deficits,  but,  according  to  the  charter,  they  must  also  redeem  all  other 
bonds  for  which  no  sinking  fund  provision  whatever  is  made.  It  is 
difficult  to  calculate  whether  the  general  and  water  sinking  funds  will  be 
able  to  meet  their  legal  requirements  because  it  is  impossible  to  guess 
what  the  general  and  water  surpluses  are  going  to  be  in  the  future.  As 
has  been  stated  repeatedly,  the  installments  which  should  go  into  a 
sinking  fund  should  be  computed  actuarially.  Tables. are  given  in  Part 
IV  to  show  how  such  annual  sinking  fund  installments  are  figured  and 
what  is  necessary  to  make  the  sinking  funds  adequate  to  meet  their 
requirements. 


PART  IV 


PROPOSED  CHANGES  IN  POLICY 
AND  PROCEDURE 

The  preceding  parts  of  this  report  have  dealt  with  the  financial 
procedure,  history  and  condition  of  the  city.  It  is  the  purpose  of  this 
part  to  consider  briefly  what  should  be  done  at  once  to  meet  the  imme¬ 
diate  crisis,  and  what  ought  to  be  done  in  the  future  in  the  way  of  effecting 
permanent  changes  in  procedure  to  better  this  financial  condition.  To 
this  end,  definite  recommendations  are  made,  not  with  a  view  to  laying 
down  in  detail  the  steps  of  a  proposed  program,  but  in  order  to  present 
the  general  principles  involved  and  to  indicate  the  relations  of  these 
principles  to  the  situation  as  it  exists  in  Rochester. 

EXPENDITURES 

The  question  as  to  what  functions  of  government  should  be  expanded 
or  restricted  and  what  particular  items  of  expenditures  should  be  changed 
involves  study  and  analysis  of  each  operating  department  of  the  city. 
Obviously  such  analysis  is  not  possible  in  a  report  of  this  kind;  therefore, 
recommendations  as  to  particular  departmental  expenditures  are  not 
presented  herein.  Attention  is  directed  solely  toward  the  general 
financial  policy  of  the  city. 

From  this  point  of  view  certain  comment  is  possible  concerning 
the  four  main  classes  of  expenditures  outlined  in  Part  II  (namely,  Debt 
Service,  Personal  Service,  Other  Current  Expenses  and  Acquisition  of 
Property) .  In  particular  it  may  be  said  that  past  expenditures  for  Debt 
Service  have  been  inadequate  and  that  adherence  to  proper  financial 
standards  requires  a  material  increase  in  this  item.  The  indebtedness 
requirements  which  necessitate  this  material  increase  are  considered 
in  detail  in  a  later  section  of  this  report  under  the  head  of  “Borrowing.” 

As  salaries  of  city  employees  were  adjusted  in  1921,  it  is  not  expected 
that  there  will  be  any  general  increase  in  the  immediate  future.  From 
time  to  time  some  adjustments  probably  will  be  made.  It  is  obvious  that 
in  the  future  the  raising  of  salaries  should  not  take  the  form  of  a  flat 
percentage  increase,  which  would  preserve  and  accentuate  the  inequalities 
existing  in  the  present  salary  schedule.  There  are  innumerable  cases  in 


49 


which  employees  of  the  city  doing  similar  work  but  in  different  depart¬ 
ments  receive  greatly  disparate  salaries.  It  is  necessary  for  the  sake  both 
of  economy  and  of  justice  to  the  employees  that  titles  and  positions  in  the 
service  should  be  standardized  before  salary  increases  are  allowed.  A 
standardization  of  titles  and  positions  as  a  basis  for  salary  adjustments 
has  already  been  recommended  by  this  Bureau  and  it  is  hoped  that  the 
adoption  of  such  a  program  will  precede  any  authorization  for  increased 
salary  expenditures. 

Similarly,  as  increased  expenditures  are  necessary  for  other  current 
expenses  such  as  materials  and  supplies,  it  is  obvious  that  such  expendi¬ 
tures  should  be  made  through  as  effective  a  purchasing  procedure  as 
possible.  A  strictly  administered  system  of  centralized  purchasing  will 
do  much  to  lower  the  cost  of  materials  and  supplies  to  the  city.  The 
operation  of  the  purchasing  procedure  which  is  now  being  used  has  been 
made  the  subject  of  a  special  investigation  by  this  Bureau  and  a  report 
embodying  recommendations  for  changes  has  been  submitted  to  the 
Mayor.  It  is  believed  that  the  necessary  steps  to  effect  the  changes  will 
be  taken  in  the  near  future. 

It  is  proper  that  expenditures  for  capital  outlays  should  be  made 
from  loan  funds  (i.  e.,  from  funds  whose  resources  are  the  proceeds  of 
borrowing),  while  current  expenditures  should  of  course  be  made  from 
current  funds.  In  other  words,  current  expenditures  should  not  be  made 
out  of  loan  funds.  It  is  also  desirable  that  to  as  large  an  extent  as  pos¬ 
sible,  some  capital  expenditures  should  be  made  out  of  current  funds. 
The  latter  was  the  practice  in  Rochester  to  a  considerable  extent  up  to 
the  time  of  the  war.  Now,  because  of  the  restrictions  of  the  tax  limit, 
most  of  the  capital  outlay  items  that  used  to  be  in  the  current  budget 
have  been  eliminated  and  are  considered  as  operations  of  the  loan  funds. 
This  seems  to  be  justified  by  the  present  exigency,  but  it  is  believed  that 
the  old  practice  should  be  resumed  as  soon  as  possible  because  of  its 
safety  and  conservatism. 

On  the  other  hand,  the  present  financial  situation  offers  a  tempta¬ 
tion  for  the  city  to  charge  as  many  current  expense  items  as  possible 
against  loan  funds  and  this  tendency  should  be  strongly  resisted.  It  is 
thought  that  the  central  financial  officers  of  the  city  should  exercise  a 
close  supervision  over  the  vouchers  which  are  charged  against  the  various 
loan  funds.  Particular  attention  is  called  to  the  application  of  this 
point  in  the  case  of  the  Water  Works  Improvement  Fund.  That  fund, 


50 


which  is  financed  by  the  proceeds  of  30-year  borrowing,  has  been  used 
to  a  considerable  extent  to  pay  claims  for  questionable  items  of  capital 
outlay,  at  least  for  items  which  •  are  very  largely  consumable  and  of 
comparatively  short  life. 

REVENUES 

Tax  Revenues 

The  effort  which  the  Department  of  Assessment  and  Taxation  is 
now  making  to  raise  the  assessed  valuations  of  Rochester  property  is 
commendable  and  is  in  line  with  the  tendency  toward  assessment  reform 
in  all  the  larger  cities  of  the  country.  It  is  generally  regarded  as  desirable 
that  the  assessed  valuations  of  property,  upon  which  taxes  are  based, 
should  f)e  made  to  coincide  as  nearly  as  may  be  possible  and  practicable 
with  the  actual  values.  It  should  be  pointed  out,  however,  that  as  the 
assessed  valuations  approach  actual  valuations,  the  way  is  opened  for 
much  more  frequent  and  insistent  objections  on  the  part  of  the  taxpayers 
to  the  decisions  of  the  assessors.  Hence,  it  is  necessary  that  the  assessors 
should  be  sure  of  themselves  and  that  the  assessed  valuations  should  be 
based  upon  some  scientific  system  of  assessment  which  will  adequately 
support  the  city  as  against  the  complaints  of  the  taxpayers.  This  matter 
of  a  revision  of  the  assessment  methods  used  in  Rochester  has  been  made 
the  subject  of  a  special  study  by  the  Bureau  of  Municipal  Research,  and 
a  report  on  the  same  has  been  recently  published. 

The  raising  of  the  assessments  will  do  much  to  relieve  the  financial 
embarrassment  of  the  city.  This  is  true  not  only  because  the  city  will 
have  a  larger  base  for  municipal  taxation,  but  also  because  the  city  will 
thereby  receive  a  larger  pro  rata  share  of  the  state  personal  income  tax. 
(See  page  18.)  But  the  big  problem  of  how  to  finance  the  constantly 
increasing  expenditures  of  the  city  cannot  be  solved  by  this  method. 
A  real  solution  must  take  into  account  the  question  of  the  validity  of  a 
municipal  tax  limit.  For  practical  reasons,  most  city  officials  are  opposed 
to  tax  limits.  It  should  be  emphasized  that  their  position  is  correct  on 
the  grounds  of  theory  and  principle. 

The  financial  operations  of  a  city  are  limited  in  a  double  way  by  the 
provision  of  the  state  constitution  relating  to  indebtedness  and  taxation. 
This  provision  was  adopted  many  years  ago  when  the  scope  of  municipal 
government  was  not  nearly  so  wide  as  it  is  now,  and  if  a  two  per  cent 
limit  was  proper  in  the  old  days  it  surely  cannot  be  said  that  a  two  per 
cent  limit  is  fair  at  the  present  time.  Not  only  is  it  true  that  the  functions 


51 


of  municipal  government  have  rapidly  increased  in  number  and  scope, 
but  it  is  obvious  also  that  a  tax  limit  is  not  a  proper  method  for  restricting 
the  activities  of  a  city.  It  would  seem  to  be  preferable  that  the  kind  of 
functions  in  which  a  city  may  engage  should  be  limited  (if  any  limitation 
whatever  is  desirable)  and  that  a  city  should  be  permitted  to  pay  as  it 
goes  for  its  authorized  activities.  Furthermore,  there  is  a  psychological 
reason  why  tax  limits  are  unnecessary — the  same  reason  that  makes 
debt  limits  necessary.  Because  of  the  immediate  and  direct  pressure 
which  taxpayers  can  bring  upon  a  city  administration,  it  is  natural  that 
a  city  should  not  desire  to  pay  for  its  current  activities  completely  as  it 
goes  and  that  it  should  desire  rather  to  put  off  to  future  generations  as 
much  of  the  burden  as  possible.  In  other  words,  the  imposition  of  taxes 
is  restrained  by  the  direct,  selfish  interests  of  the  taxpayers;  while  there 
is  no  such  influence  restraining  the  borrowing  of  money  and  the  shifting 
of  burdens  to  the  future.  Hence,  it  seems  only  logical  that  for  taxes  an 
artificial  legislative  restriction  is  not  necessary  but  that  for  borrowing 
such  a  restriction  is  necessary. 

It  is  important  that  the  city  should  recognize  its  position  in  this 
matter  of  the  tax  limit  and  it  is  recommended  that  the  city  officials  take 
an  out-and-out  stand  against  the  constitutional  tax  limit  of  the  state. 
To  change  the  constitutional  provision  itself  seems  to  be  an  impossible 
task,  but  there  are  other  ways  in  which  the  city  can  use  its  influence  in 
the  movement  to  change  the  tax  limit.  Without  amending  the  constitu¬ 
tion,  the  tax  limit  can  be  changed  in  effect  by  securing  the  exemption 
from  it  of  certain  functions  of  the  city  government,  such  as  education. 
The  logic  of  the  situation  with  respect  to  education  has  been  discussed 
previously  in  this  report.  A  movement  is  on  foot  to  have  the  state 
legislature  “define”  education  out  from  under  the  constitutional  provision. 
This  movement  has  also  taken  the  form  of  a  suggestion  that  the  cost  of 
education  be  financed  out  of  separate  school  tax  levies.  Possibly  such 
separate  school  levies  would  be  subjected  to  another  tax  limit,  but  it 
would  at  least  have  the  effect  of  raising  the  two  per  cent  limit. 

Utility  Revenues 

Inasmuch  as  the  Water  Works  is  the  one  large  utility  owned  by 
the  City  of  Rochester,  consideration  of  utility  revenues  is  largely  con¬ 
fined  to  a  consideration  of  the  adequacy  of  the  water  rate  and  the  various 
other  charges  for  service  imposed  by  the  Water  Bureau.  It  need  only  be 
stated  here  that  the  question  ot  utility  revenues  is  quite  detached  from  the 


52 


other  financial  problems  of  the  city  because  of  the  principle  that  a  utility 
should  be  completely  self-sustaining.  The  complete  financial  burden  of  a 
utility  should  be  carried  by  its  own  revenue  and  it  should  not  be  sub¬ 
sidized  from  the  general  fund  of  the  city;  nor  should  it  be  required  on 
the  other  hand  to  contribute  a  surplus  to  the  general  fund  of  the  city. 

Miscellaneous  Revenues 

The  most  important  single  item  in  the  list  of  miscellaneous  revenues 
of  the  city  is  the  city’s  share  of  the  state  income  tax.  This  tax  consists 
of  two  parts:  the  tax  on  personal  incomes  which  is  distributed  one  half 
to  the  cities  on  the  basis  of  assessment  valuations ;  and  the  tax  on  corpor¬ 
ation  incomes  which  is  distributed  one-third  to  the  cities  on  the  basis  of 
the  location  of  the  businesses.  The  exemption  of  personal  property 
from  municipal  taxation  is  a  supplementary  provision  of  the  state  income 
tax  law.  In  seeking  for  new  sources  of  revenue  the  question  has  often 
arisen  as  to  whether  or  not  cities  could  tap  the  source  of  income  taxation, 
since  real  estate  is  already  heavily  burdened.  The  administrative  diffi¬ 
culties  of  local  collection,  however,  make  municipal  income  taxes  imprac¬ 
ticable.  But  it  has  been  suggested  that  the  cities  of  the  state  might 
secure  more  revenue  from  this  source  indirectly,  by  being  granted  a  larger 
share  of  the  state  income  tax.  This  last  suggestion  seems  to  be  a  practical 
one  and  it  is  therefore  recommended  that  the  City  of  Rochester  actively 
back  the  movement  to  obtain  for  municipalities  a  larger  share  of  that  tax 
than  they  are  now  receiving. 

An  upward  revision  of  the  license  and  permit  fees  is  one  of  the  first 
steps  commonly  employed  by  cities  in  meeting  their  needs  for  more 
revenues.  Particular  attention  should  be  given  to  this  method  in 
Rochester  because  the  revenues  from  this  source  appear  to  be  less  than 
in  most  other  cities  of  similar  size.  In  Rochester  license  fees  are  lower 
than  the  average,  there  are  fewer  occupations  licensed,  and  no  fees  at 
all  are  charged  for  permits.  Comparative  collections  from  this  source 
in  1919  (last  available  figures  in  this  form)  for  thirteen  cities  of  Roch¬ 
ester’s  population  class  are  shown  in  Table  36.  The  total  collections  are 
divided  into  five  classes: — 

(1)  Business  taxes  without  issue  of  license. 

(2)  Business  taxes  with  issue  of  license. 

(3)  Dog  Licenses. 

(4)  General  Licenses. 

(5)  Permits. 


53 


It  will  be  seen  that  Rochester  is  almost  at  the  bottom  of  the  list  as  far 
as  amount  of  collections  is  concerned. 

It  has  been  the  practice  for  southern  cities  to  impose  special  business 
taxes  on  practically  every  business,  trade,  or  occupation  as  an  exercise 
of  their  revenue-raising  power.  There  is  doubt  as  to  the  legality  of 
such  procedure  in  the  cities  of  New  York  State,  but  much  larger  license 
fees  and  more  of  them  can  be  imposed  as  an  incident  to  the  exercise  of 
the  police  power.  The  courts  have  held  that  the  imposition  of  license 
fees  is  an  exercise  of  police  power  provided  there  is  a  reasonable  relation 
between  the  amount  of  the  fee  and  the  cost  of  the  police  or  other  supervi¬ 
sion  required.  Under  this  interpretation  of  the  city’s  police  power, 
there  is  ample  justification  for  the  suggestion  that  the  present  license 
fees  be  raised  to  correspond  more  nearly  with  those  imposed  in  other 
large  cities.  Then,  in  addition,  there  are  other  occupations  or  businesses 
which  are,  or  ought  to  be,  subject  to  municipal  regulation  and  which 
are  not  now  licensed.  Among  such  non-licensed  occupations  may  be 
mentioned  dealers  in  certain  food  products,  automobile  agencies,  dealers 
in  explosives  (gasoline  dealers,  gas  filling  stations,  kerosene  or  naphtha 
dealers,  dealers  in  fireworks,  powder  or  firearms),  dances  and  stands  in 
public  places. 

Until  recently,  Rochester  was  the  only  large  city  in  the  State  of  New 
York  which  did  not  license  public  vehicles  (taxicabs,  etc.).  With  the 
adoption  of  a  motorcab  ordinance,  the  city  now  regulates  these  vehicles 
and  imposes  fees  which  amount  to  a  considerable  sum. 

As  stated,  the  City  of  Rochester  does  not  charge  fees  for  its  various 
permits.  Here  again  there  is  room  for  additional  revenue.  The  city 
would  be  justified  in  charging  fees  to  cover  at  least  the  clerical  and 
inspection  cost  of  granting  permits.  Some  cities  also  charge  a  periodic 
fee  or  rental  where  periodic  inspection  is  necessary  or  where  the  privilege 
granted  is  of  a  permanent  nature.  Of  the  former  class  would  be  a  fee 
for  periodic  inspection  of  boilers  or  elevators;  of  the  latter  class  would 
be  a  rental  for  the  privileges  of  encroaching  on  public  streets  with  signs 
and  areaways.  Permits  which  might  be  covered  by  fees  are  of  two 
general  classes,  as  follows: 

i.  Building  Permits. 

To  build. 

To  occupy. 

To  demolish. 


54 


To  move. 

To  install  plumbing. 

To  install  boilers. 

To  install  electricity. 

To  install  elevators. 

(Fees  for  original  permits;  fees  for  periodic  inspection, 
where  necessary.) 

2.  Permits  for  encroachments  or  occupancy  of  streets. 

To  excavate  in  street,  temporarily. 

To  store  materials  in  street,  temporarily. 

To  enclose  street  for  building  purposes,  temporarily. 

To  move  heavy  loads  over  streets. 

To  move  buildings  over  streets. 

To  erect  signs,  awnings,  bay  windows,  hoods,  marquees, 
balconies,  cornices,  etc.,  over  street  lines. 

(Fees  for  original  permits;  periodic  rentals  for  privileges, 
if  title  of  streets  is  in  city.) 

To  construct  areas,  cellars,  tunnels,  bridges,  tracks,  pipes, 
etc.,  under,  on,  or  over  streets. 

(Fees  for  original  permits;  periodic  rentals  for  privileges, 
if  title  of  streets  is  in  city.) 

Considerable  data  have  been  gathered  by  the  Bureau  of  Municipal 
Research  on  the  rates  and  fees  charged  by  other  large  cities  and  by  New 
York  cities  for  permits  and  licenses.  If  the  city  desires  to  consider 
this  recommendation  that  rates  and  fees  be  raised  or  be  imposed  where 
now  there  are  none,  such  detailed  information  will  gladly  be  placed  at 
its  disposal. 

ASSESSMENTS 

* 

No  changes  are  recommended  at  this  time  with  regard  to  the  pro¬ 
cedure  for  levying  assessments  for  local  improvements. 

It  is  recommended  that  the  city’s  share  of  local  improvement  assess¬ 
ments  which  is  delinquent  at  the  present  time  be  taken  care  of 
immediately  as  a  part  of  the  city’s  bonding  program.  It  is  thought 
also  that  the  Charter  should  be  changed  to  provide  a  method  whereby 
such  accounts  will  be  properly  taken  care  of  in  the  future.  The  Charter 
also  should  stipulate  that  those  improvements  for  which  the  city  at 


55 


large  is  to  pay  the  whole  cost  shall  be  financed  out  of  special  loan  funds 
and  not  out  of  assessment  funds.  These  recommendations  will  be  ampli¬ 
fied  in  the  next  section. 

BORROWING 

# 

The  borrowing  question  has  two  aspects:  first,  what  shall  be  done 
in  the  immediate  future  to  carry  the  city  over  its  present  financial  crisis; 
and  second,  what  changes  in  policy  and  procedure  shall  be  instituted 
to  protect  the  city  against  unwise  borrowing  and  against  inadequate 
debt  service. 

Immediate  Program 

Referring  to  the  immediate  borrowing  program,  it  should  be  pointed 
out  that  the  city  is  wise  in  funding  as  soon  as  possible  its  outstanding 
temporary  indebtedness.  An  analysis  of  the  temporary  indebtedness  as  of 
December  31,  1922,  is  shown  in  Table  30.  With  respect  to  these  notes 
and  the  bonds  that  are  proposed  to  be  issued,  the  following  recommenda¬ 
tions  are  made: 

1 .  The  term  and  type  of  the  assessment  bonds  should  be  determined 
from  purely  fiscal  considerations. 

2.  The  Sewage  Disposal  and  Municipal  Building  Construction 
bonds  should  have  a  term  of  not  more  than  twenty  years. 

3.  The  Land  Purchase,  School  and  Water  bonds  may  justifiably 
be  issued  for  a  thirty  year  term. 

4.  All  bonds  issued  should  be  of  the  serial  type.  [This  is  to  insure 
adequate  redemption.] 

5.  If  any  of  the  bonds  issued  are  of  the  sinking  fund  type  rather 
than  the  serial  type,  it  is  suggested  that  the  authorizing  ordinances 
include  provision  for  sinking  fund  installments  “sufficient  to  amortize 
at  maturity,”  rather  than  the  customary  provision  for  annual  install¬ 
ments  of  one  per  cent. 

6.  The  indebtedness  of  the  city  to  the  Local  Improvement  Fund 
on  account  of  delinquent  local  improvement  assessments  should  be  taken 
care  of  by  an  issue  of  ten  year  serial  City  Improvement  Bonds. 

7.  The  temporary  indebtedness  incurred  on  account  of  current 
expenses  (or  budget  deficiencies)  should  not  be  funded  at  all,  but  should 
be  placed  in  the  next  year’s  budget. 


56 


In  view  of  the  situation  in  which  the  city  finds  itself  and  in  view  of 
the  fact  that  the  city  must  get  around  the  tax  limit,  if  it  is  to  finance  its 
operations  adequately,  it  is  recommended  that  the  city  engage  tem¬ 
porarily  in  current  expense  borrowing  such  as  was  done  in  1920,  1921  and 
1922.  This  is  recommended  with  the  provision  that  temporary  current 
expense  indebtedness  shall  not  be  funded,  but  shall  in  every  case  be  in¬ 
cluded  in  the  budget  of  the  year  following  that  in  which  the  indebtedness 
is  incurred.  Normally  this  is  an  unwise  and  expensive  proceeding  and  it 
is  justified  in  the  present  emergency  only  for  the  technical  reasons  which 
have  already  been  explained.  Furthermore,  this  recommendation  is 
pertinent  only  in  case  the  city  does  not  succeed  in  securing  legislative 
authorization  for  the  exemption  of  educational  costs  from  the  tax  limit. 

Bonding  Section  for  the  Charter 

The  situation  of  the  city  with  respect  to  indebtedness  and  sinking 
funds  can  be  remedied  most  effectively  by  charter  amendments.  The 
adoption  of  a  bonding  program  such  as  has  been  recommended  above 
for  the  immediate  future  would  partially  solve  the  indebtedness  problem 
of  the  city,  provided  it  were  continued  year  after  year.  But  it  is  thought 
that  the  only  safe  way  in  which  to  guard  the  city  against  an  abuse  of  its 
borrowing  power  is  to  write  into  the  charter  certain  financial  limitations. 

The  section  of  the  charter  dealing  with  the  borrowing  power  does 
not  seem  to  be  consistent  with  other  sections  of  the  charter  having  to  do 
with  other  subjects.  In  other  words,  the  provisions  relating  to  borrowing 
seem  to  be  broader,  less  detailed  and  to  give  more  unlimited  power  to 
the  Common  Council  than  do  other  sections  of  the  charter.  It  was 
pointed  out  in  the  discussion  of  tax  limits  and  debt  limits  that  the  borrow¬ 
ing  power  of  the  city  should  in  the  nature  of  the  case  be  more  strictly 
limited  than  any  other  power  given  to  the  city.  The  Rochester  charter 
does  not  recognize  this  cardinal  difference.  There  are  exceedingly 
detailed  limitations  on  some  functions  of  the  city  where  there  should  be 
none,  and,  on  the  other  hand,  there  is  a  lack  of  limitations  where  such 
limitations  would  logically  seem  to  be  necessary. 

The  charter  delegation  of  borrowing  power  to  the  city  is  exceedingly 
broad.  The  only  real  limitations  are  two:  first,  that  no  bonds  issued 
by  the  city  shall  have  a  term  of  more  than  thirty  years;  second,  that 
bonds  issued  to  meet  appropriations  for  current  expenses  shall  have  a 
term  not  to  exceed  five  years.  The  first  of  these  limitations  is  vitiated 
because  of  the  freedom  allowed  the  city  to  refund  an  issue  of  bonds  as 


57 


often  as  it  desires.  The  second  provision  also  is  capable  of  similar 
manipulation  and  an  additional  one  because  there  is  nothing  in  the 
charter  to  limit  the  number  of  times  that  temporary  notes  issued  for 
current  expenses  may  be  renewed  before  they  are  funded  into  bonds. 
These  limitations  in  themselves,  however,  are  exceedingly  desirable  and 
should  be  retained.  They  will  be  strengthened  by  the  addition  of  other 
limitations  which  the  charter  should  be  amended  to  include.  These 
additional  limitations  are  given  in  summary  form  following : — 

1.  “ Bonds  issued  to  meet  appropriations  for  current  expenses  not 
anticipated  or  provided  for  out  of  current  revenues,  shall  run 
for  a  period  not  exceeding  five  years.”  To  this  should  be  added 
the  provision  that  in  case  such  bonds  are  issued  to  fund  tempor¬ 
ary  notes  which  were  originally  issued  for  the  same  purpose, 
the  maximum  term  allowable  for  the  bonds  should  be  reduced 
so  that  the  aggregate  period  of  time  from  the  date  of  issue  of 
the  original  notes  to  the  maturity  of  the  bonds  should  not 
exceed  five  years.  The  refunding  of  such  bonds  should  be 
prohibited. 

2.  Bonds  issued  for  improvements  (except  those  issued  to  provide 
working  capital  for  assessment  funds  or  those  issued  to  fund 
the  city’s  share  of  assessment  charges)  should  be  for  a  term  not 
to  exceed  the  estimated  life  of  the  improvements.  Before 
authorizing  such  bonds,  the  Common  Council  should  obtain 
from  the  City  Engineer  his  certification  as  to  the  estimated 
life  of  the  improvements  for  which  the  bonds  are  to  provide 
the  money. 

3.  Improvements  for  which  the  city  at  large  is  to  pay  the  whole 
cost  should  not  be  financed  out  of  assessment  funds,  but  either 
out  of  current  funds  or  out  of  special  loan  funds  which  are  created 
for  the  purpose. 

4.  The  city’s  share  of  assessments  for  local  improvements,  if  not 
paid  annually  out  of  current  funds,  should  be  annually  funded 
by  the  issue  of  City  Improvement  Bonds  which  should  be  serial 
bonds  and  should  have  a  term  of  not  more  than  ten  years. 

5.  In  the  case  of  bonds  issued  for  improvements  (except  those 
issued  to  provide  working  capital  for  assessment  funds),  the 
Common  Council  should  make  adequate  provision  for  redemp- 


58 


tion  either  by  providing  in  the  bond  contract  for  some  type  of 
serial  re-payment  of  principal  or  else  by  authorizing  the  creation 
of  a  sinking  fund  and  an  annual  sinking  fund  installment  ade¬ 
quate  completely  to  amortize  the  bonds  at  maturity. 

6.  For  all  bonds  for  which  sinking  funds  are  created,  it  should  be 
the  duty  of  the  Comptroller  to  calculate  actuarially  the  annual 
installments  necessary  to  be  set  aside,  and  it  should  be  his  duty 
annually  to  insert  the  aggregate  of  such  sinking  fund  install¬ 
ments  in  the  estimates  of  the  current  budget. 

7.  In  addition  to  the  present  charter  sinking  funds,  there  should  be 
created  cwo  Supplementary  Sinking  Funds,  namely,  supple¬ 
mentary  funds  to  the  general  sinking  funds  and  the  water  sinking 
funds.  The  Supplementary  Sinking  Funds  should  be  computed 
on  an  actuarial  basis  and  used  to  supply  the  deficiencies  in  the 
present  funds  so  that  the  current  obligations  of  the  city  can  be 
paid  at  maturity. 

The  purpose  of  the  first  charter  amendment  suggested  above  is  to 
provide  a  sufficient  limitation  upon  the  length  of  time  that  the  redemp¬ 
tion  of  current  expense  borrowing  may  be  delayed.  Generally  speaking, 
it  is  inadvisable  to  permit  of  borrowing  for  current  expenses  at  all,  but 
such  limitation  should  not  be  written  into  the  charter  because  it  is  con¬ 
ceivable  that  emergencies  might  arise  when  extraordinary  expenditures 
would  be  necessary  and  in  such  cases  it  is  thought  current  expense 
borrowing  on  a  five-year  basis  would  be  justified.  [An  epidemic  seriously 
threatening  the  health  or  safety  of  the  city  is  an  example  of  such  an 
emergency.  The  current  expense  borrowing  in  which  the  city  is  now 
engaging  in  order  to  get  around  the  tax  limit  in  a  technical  sense  cannot 
be  considered  as  emergency  borrowing  and  there  would  be  no  justification 
for  funding  on  a  five-year  basis.]  The  first  sentence  of  the  above  pro¬ 
posal  is  in  the  charter  now;  but  the  additional  limitations  are  needed  to 
strengthen  it. 

The  second  charter  limitation  recommended  is  in  line  with  the  usual 
provision  of  state  laws  relating  to  municipal  finances.  Most  every 
municipal  bonding  law  includes  a  provision  that  the  term  of  improvement 
bonds  shall  not  exceed  the  estimated  life  of  the  improvements  for  which 
the  money  is  to  be  spent.  The  equity  of  this  provision  is  obvious.  The 
people  who  receive  the  benefit  of  an  improvement  should  pay  for  such 
benefit  and  should  not  be  able  to  shift  the  burden  to  a  future  generation 


59 


which  does  not  receive  the  benefit  and  which  in  all  probability  will 
have  additional  obligations  properly  its  own.  This  limitation  is  a  maxi¬ 
mum  limitation  only.  It  is  obvious  that  if  a  contemplated  improvement 
will  have  a  life  of  more  than  thirty  years,  the  term  of  the  bonds  would 
come  under  the  present  charter  limitation  which  specifies  a  maximum  of 
thirty  years  for  all  bonds.  This  thirty  year  maximum  is  justified  in 
every  case  for  fiscal  reasons.  .The  cost  of  an  exceedingly  long  term 
bond  is  so  excessive  that  thirty  or  thirty-five  years  is  generally  considered 
as  the  longest  allowable  term  which  is  at  all  economical. 

Assessment  bonds  are  excepted  from  this  provision  because  such 
bonds  are  issued  merely  to  secure  working  capital  for  a  fund  which  is 
used  to  finance  a  large  number  of  individual  improvements  or 
“ordinances.”  The  financial  principle  that  an  improvement  should 
be  paid  for  during  its  life  is  not  violated  by  allowing  this  exception. 
The  provisions  of  the  charter  which  lay  down  the  local  assessment 
procedure  and  which  stipulate  that  every  particular  ordinance  shall 
be  paid  for  by  the  property  owners  benefited  in  not  more  than  ten  annual 
installments,  adequately  carry  out  this  principle.  The  term  of  assess¬ 
ment  bonds,  therefore,  needs  to  have  no  relation  to  the  life  of  any  local 
improvement  which  is  financed  by  any  assessment  fund  under  these 
other  charter  provisions.  Bonds  issued  to  take  care  of  the  city’s  share 
of  local  assessment  charges  are  likewise  excepted  from  the  charter  change 
suggested.  This  is  because  the  aggregate  indebtedness  of  the  general 
fund  to  the  local  improvement  fund  on  account  of  the  city’s  share  of 
assessments  represents  a  good  many  separate  improvements,  some  of 
which  are  short-lived  and  others  of  which  are  long-lived. 

The  third  limitation,  which  it  is  thought  should  be  placed  in  the 
bonding  section  of  the  charter,  has  to  do  with  the  kind  of  improve¬ 
ments  to  be  financed  out  of  the  Local  Improvement  Fund.  Ad¬ 
vantage  has  been  taken  of  the  Local  Improvement  Fund  in  the  past  by 
charging  against  it  several  improvements  for  which  the  ordinances 
specify  that  ioo  per  cent  of  the  cost  should  be  charged  against  the  city 
at  large.  The  purpose  of  the  Local  Improvement  Fund  is  to  provide  a 
means  of  financing  improvements,  the  cost  of  which  is  to  be  borne  by 
the  property  owners  benefited.  Obviously,  if  only  one  quarter  of  the 
total  cost  is  to  be  assessed  against  the  benefited  property  owners,  the 
improvement  still  would  have  to  be  financed  by  the  Local  Improvement 
Fund.  But  there  is  no  justification  for  placing  the  so-called  ‘Too  per 


60 


cent  improvements”  in  the  Local  Improvement  Fund.  The  recom¬ 
mended  charter  amendment  would  prevent  such  an  abuse  and  require 
that  a  loan  fund  be  set  up  for  the  particular  purpose.  Each  such  improve¬ 
ment  would  come  under  the  provision  suggestd  in  paragraph  two 
above  and  would  be  financed  by  the  issue  of  bonds  for  a  term  not  greater 
than  the  estimated  life  of  the  improvement,  nor  greater  than  thirty  years 
in  any  event. 

With  regard  to  the  fourth  provision  recommended,  it  may  be  said 
that  the  suggested  limitation  aims  at  the  present  practice  of  not  taking 
care  annually  of  the  city’s  share  of  local  assessments.  In  a  general  way 
there  are  two  methods  for  handling  this  item  of  expense:  first,  the  city 
may  pay  as  it  goes,  i.  e.,  to  insert  in  the  annual  budget  an  amount  sufficient 
to  cover  the  liability;  and  second,  the  city  may  fund  the  liability  by 
issuing  bonds.  Of  the  two  methods  the  pay-as-you-go  method  has  the 
advantage  of  being  cheaper,  but  it  has  the  disadvantage  of  subjecting 
the  city  to  extremely  variable  charges.  During  one  year  the  charges 
which  become  due  may  be  very  small  in  amount,  while  the  next  year 
they  may  be  large  in  amount.  For  example,  in  the  year  1922,  the  charges 
of  this  kind  against  the  city  exceeded  $1,000,000,  an  excessive  amount 
as  compared  to  the  amounts  of  other  years.  This  difficulty  is  obviated 
by  funding  the  liability,  although  the  cost  is  somewhat  greater.  The 
funding  of  the  liability  will  spread  the  burden  more  evenly  over  the  years 
and  for  this  reason  it  is  recommended  that  the  funding  plan  be  made 
optional.  Inasmuch  as  the  total  charge  against  the  city  may  cover  a 
large  number  of  individual  improvements,  some  of  which  are  compara¬ 
tively  short-lived  and  others  of  which  are  long-lived,  it  is  suggested  that 
the  maximum  term  allowed  for  these  City  Improvement  Bonds  should 
be  ten  years,  which  is  the  maximum  time  allowed  to  private  property 
owners  for  paying  their  assessments.  It  is  thought  advisable  also  that 
these  bonds  should  be  of  the  serial  type,  because  of  their  short  term 
and  because  of  the  economy  and  safety  of  the  serial  method. 

The  most  important  charter  change  in  the  foregoing  list  would 
requiie  the  Common  Council  to  make  adequate  provision  for  the  redemp¬ 
tion  of  all  improvement  bonds  issued.  [Here  again  assessment  bonds 
are  excepted  for  the  reasons  previously  given.]  Charter  limitations  as 
to  the  term  of  bonds  have  no  meaning  unless  there  is  also  this  require¬ 
ment  that  adequate  provision  be  made  for  redemption.  It  has  been 
customary  of  late  years  to  permit  cities,  in  exercising  their  borrowing 


61 


power,  to  issue  only  serial  bonds.  Cities  have  been  subjected  to  this 
limitation  not  only  because  serial  bonds  usually  are  more  economical 
than  sinking  fund  bonds,  but  mainly  because  their  redemption  is  auto¬ 
matically  provided  for  and  because  sinking  funds  have  usually  been 
unwisely  handled  by  all  the  municipal  governments  in  the  country.  In 
the  provision  here  suggested,  Rochester  would  not  be  limited  so  narrowly. 
However,  if  the  city  should  use  its  option  and  issue  term  bonds  rather 
than  serial  bonds,  the  proposed  provision  requires  the  establishment  of 
an  adequate  sinking  fund. 

The  sixth  amendment  recommended  is  supplemental  to  the  fifth 
and  makes  it  the  duty  of  the  Comptroller  to  calculate  the  sinking  fund 
installments  for  all  sinking  fund  bonds.  Considering  the  two  provisions 
together  it  is  easy  to  see  that  if  the  Council  does  not  authorize  serial 
bonds  (which  automatically  take  care  of  redemption)  it  must  authorize 
an  adequate  sinking  fund.  As  soon  as  such  a  sinking  fund  has  been 
authorized  it  becomes  the  duty  of  the  Comptroller  to  calculate  the  install¬ 
ments  on  an  actuarial  basis  and  to  place  them  in  the  debt  service  items 
of  the  budget  each  year.  It  is  thought  that  these  two  provisions  taken 
together  will  protect  the  city  against  any  unwise  borrowing  in  the  future, 
as  far  as  provision  for  redemption  is  concerned. 

The  seventh  charter  change  proposed  above  requires  the  establish¬ 
ment  of  two  additional  sinking  funds  to  supplement  the  present  charter 
sinking  funds.  It  is  possible  for  the  Common  Council  to  establish  by 
ordinance  the  necessary  sinking  funds  to  accomplish  this  purpose.  (The 
present  sinking  funds  are  unscientific,  inasmuch  as  there  is  no  relation 
established  between  their  resources  and  their  obligations.  It  will  be 
remembered  that  the  resources  of  these  sinking  funds  consist  primarily 
of  other  fund  surpluses  which  may  prove  to  be  less  than,  equal  to,  or 
greater  than  the  actual  requirements  of  the  funds  in  this,  but  which  are 
not  governed  at  all  by  those  requirements.  Obviously  there  should  be 
only  two  resources  for  any  sinking  fund:  first,  the  income  from  cash 
balances  on  investments;  the  second,  the  annual  installments  which  are 
calculated  actuarially  and  which  should  be  sufficient  at  the  maturity  of 
the  bonds  to  amortize  them  completely.)  It  is  therefore  suggested  that 
in  addition  to  the  present  sinking  funds,  the  two  supplementary  funds 
mentioned  be  established  to  relieve  the  present  insolvent  conditions  of 
the  funds.  It  is  not  legally  possible  to  abolish  the  funds  and  replace  them 
by  consolidated  funds  on  adequate  bases,  but  it  is  possible  and  proper  to 
create  these  additional  funds  to  overcome  the  shortages  of  the  others. 


62 


To  take  care  of  the  present  outstanding  sinking  fund  indebtedness 
adequately,  it  will  be  necessary  to  place  in  the  water  sinking  funds  an 
annual  installment  of  $206,000.  This  should  be  compared  with  the 
inadequate  installment  of  $86,940  which  is  being  set  aside  at  the  present 
time.  (See  Table  39.)  Similarly,  the  sinking  fund  installment  necessary 
to  take  care  of  all  outstanding  general  term  bonds  (this  includes  both 
school  and  general)  would  be  $121,000.  (See  Table  38.)  The  install¬ 
ments  now  being  placed  in  the  general  sinking  funds  are  short  of  this 
amount  by  about  $8,350  (not  considering  general  fund  surpluses). 

FUNDS 

Under  the  present  charter  provisions  it  seems  to  be  impossible  for 
the  city  to  separate  its  fund  accounting  from  its  proprietary  accounting. 
In  other  words,  the  city  cannot  keep  a  separate  account  on  the  one  hand 
of  its  funds,  appropriations,  and  allowances,  and  on  the  other  hand  of 
its  assets  and  liabilities.  The  lack  of  distinction  between  the  two  types 
of  accounting  in  Rochester  has  gone  so  far  that  the  Treasurer’s  cash 
account  has  been  split  up  into  various  parts  to  correspond  with  the 
various  funds  of  the  city.  There  is  a  separate  cash  account,  a  separate 
bank  book  and  a  separate  check  book  for  each  fund  and  in  many  cases 
for  subdivisions  of  funds.  A  voucher  or  claim  against  the  city  cannot 
be  charged  against  more  than  a  single  fund  account  and  the  check  which 
is  issued  to  cover  the  voucher  carries  the  name  of  the  fund  account 
against  which  it  is  drawn.  This  unsatisfactory  procedure  seems  to  be 
required  by  the  following  provision  of  the  charter : — 

“The  treasurer  must  keep  a  separate  account  with  every  depart¬ 
ment,  board,  bureau,  court,  office,  appropriation  and  fund  for  which 
moneys  are  appropriated  in  the  annual  estimate  or  raised  by  assessment 
and  must  in  every  check  or  draft  drawn  by  him  state  particularly  against 
which  of  such  funds  it  is  drawn,  unless  the  money  is  drawn  for  use  in 
his  office.  He  must  at  no  time  permit  any  of  the  appropriations  for 
the  same  including  moneys  lawfully  added  thereto  to  be  overdrawn,  or 
a  claim  chargeable  to  one  fund  to  be  charged  to  another.”  (Part  of 
Section  162.) 

The  requirement  that  the  Treasurer  shall  keep  account  of  funds  and 
appropriations  seems  to  be  entirely  unnecessary  in  view  of  the  fact  that 
this  is  one  of  the  primary  duties  of  the  Comptroller.  The  Comptroller’s 
chief  function  is  to  keep  account  of  funds,  appropriations  and  allowances, 


63 


while  the  treasurer's  chief  function  is  to  act  as  custodian  and  to  keep 
account  of  cash.  In  order  that  the  duplication  of  fund  accounting  in 
the  two  offices  may  be  eliminated  and  in  order  that  fund  accounting 
may  be  separated  from  proprietary  accounting,  it  is  recommended  that 
the  foregoing  provision  be  eliminated  from  the  charter.  It  is  thought 
that  this  will  clear  the  way  for  the  installation  of  adequate  fund  accounts 
in  the  Comptroller’s  office,  and  that  it  will  permit  of  the  handling  and 
disposition  of  cash  from  a  purely  fiscal  point  of  view. 

It  is  also  thought  advisable  to  have  an  additional  paragraph  in 
the  charter  relating  in  a  general  way  to  the  funds  of  the  city.  It  is 
suggested  that  such  a  paragraph  should  contain  the  following 
provisions : — 

1.  A  general  classification  of  funds  such  as  current  funds,  assess¬ 
ment  funds,  loan  funds,  sinking  funds  and  trust  funds. 

2.  Premiums  received  from  the  sale  of  bonds  should  be  placed  in 
separate  premium  funds  which  should  be  applied  only  to  the 
payment  of  interest. 

3.  Proceeds  from  the  sale  of  capital  assets  should  not  be  credited 
to  current  funds,  but  only  to  capital  or  loan  funds. 

4.  The  utilities  operated  by  the  city  should  be  regarded  as  self- 
sustaining  utilities  and  separate  funds  should  be  set  up  to  show 
their  operation  as  such. 

5.  The  Comptroller  should  have  the  power  to  set  up  new  funds  or 
subdivide  existing  funds  for  purposes  of  information. 

6.  The  Common  Council  should  have  the  power  to  subdivide 
existing  funds  or  set  up  new  funds  or  in  any  way  classify  or 
limit  appropriations  and  allowances,  not  otherwise  contrary  to 
law,  for  purposes  of  controlling  expenditures. 

In  addition  to  the  above,  another  change  should  be  made  which 
does  not  involve  a  charter  amendment.  It  is  recommended  that  the 
Comptroller  set  up  in  his  accounts  and  in  the  budget  a  separate  school 
fund.  School  expenditures  have  heretofore  been  regarded  as  a  part  of 
the  liabilities  of  the  general  fund,  but  there  are  several  reasons,  especially 
pertinent  at  the  present  time,  why  a  separate  fund  should  be  created. 
The  setting  up  of  this  separate  school  fund  should  go  hand  in  hand  with 
a  separate  consideration  of  school  expenditures  in  the  city  budget.  If 
this  is  done,  the  budget  will  comprehend  four  current  funds,  namely; 


64 


the  general  fund,  the  school  fund,  the  water  fund,  and  the  public  market 
fund.  This  recommendation  should  be  considered  in  the  light  of  what 
has  already  been  said  with  reference  to  current  expense  borrowing.  If 
it  is  necessary  for  the  city  to  engage  in  current  expense  borrowing  (because 
of  the  tax  limit),  then  it  would  seem  advisable  that  such  current  expense 
borrowing  should  be  restricted  to  the  school  fund  and  should  not  be  per¬ 
mitted  in  the  general  fund. 

The  reasons  why  it  seems  desirable  to  have  a  separate  school  fund 
may  be  summarized  as  follows : 

1.  The  recent,  rapid  increase  in  the  cost  of  government  is  due 
mainly  to  education. 

2.  The  State  Education  Law  relating  to  salary  increases  (Lockwood 
Law,  1920)  requires  that  the  quotas  given  by  the  state  to  the 
city  for  the  purpose  of  salary  increases  shall  be  kept  separate 
from  and  not  included  in  the  general  fund  for  the  reduction  of 
taxes. 

3.  The  administration  of  the  school  budget  is  almost  entirely 
uncontrolled  by  the  city  officials  and  it  gives  an  accurate  picture 
of  the  situation  to  separate  the  controlled  expenditures  from 
the  uncontrolled  expenditures.  (See  page  42.) 

4.  The  general  departments  of  the  city  can  best  be  kept  from  the 
temptation  to  incur  budget  deficits,  thus  necessitating  current 
expense  borrowing,  by  setting  up  a  separate  school  fund  and 
restricting  this  means  of  financing  to  that  fund. 

5.  The  tendency  of  legislation  seems  to  be  that  education  shall  be 
regarded  as  a  state  rather  than  a  local  function,  and  it  is  entirely 
possible  that  expenditures  for  education  may  be  exempted  from 
the  constitutional  tax  limit  by  legislative  action. 

With  regard  to  an  expenditure  .analysis  and  a  budget  classification 
for  the  Department  of  Public  Instruction,  it  is  thought  unnecessary  that 
the  Comptroller’s  office  should  keep  a  detailed  analysis  as  it  does  for 
the  other  departments,  or  that  the  appropriations  to  that  Department 
should  be  segregated  in  any  way  except  to  make  a  separation  as  between 
current  expenses,  fixed  charges,  acquisition  of  property,  and  redemption 
of  debt.  The  Department  of  Public  Instruction  should  be  permitted 
to  make  its  own  expenditure  analysis  according  to  a  classification  that 
will  satisfy  its  own  needs.  Inasmuch  as  educational  expenditures  are 


65 


not  controlled  by  the  financial  officers  of  the  city,  such  an  expenditure 
classification  does  not  need  to  be  supervised  by  the  Comptroller  except 
to  see  that  total  expenditures  are  within  the  appropriations  and 
allowances. 

BUDGET 

Two  recommendations  are  made  with  respect  to  the  budget  which 
do  not  require  charter  changes:  first,  that  the  charter  provision  stipulat¬ 
ing  November  first  as  the  last  date  for  the  submission  of  departmental 
estimates  to  the  Mayor  be  enforced;  second,  that  the  budget  include 
the  complete  financial  program  for  the  current  funds,  i.  e.,  it  should 
include  borrowing  for  current  expenses  as  a  resource  of  the  budget. 

It  was  stated  previously  that  the  financial  plans  for  1920,  1921  and 
1922  included  the  borrowing  for  current  expenses,  but  that  these  bor¬ 
rowings  did  not  appear  in  the  budget  either  as  means  of  financing  on 
the  one  side  or  as  planned  expenditures  on  the  other.  There  seems  to 
be  nothing  in  the  charter  to  prevent  the  Board  of  Estimate  and  Appor¬ 
tionment  from  setting  up  the  proceeds  of  current  expense  borrowing  as 
one  of  the  resources  of  the  current  budget  (in  addition  to  tax  revenues  and 
miscellaneous  revenues),  and  from  making  a  complete  appropriation  for 
the  contemplated  current  expenditure.  The  budget  does  not  amount 
to  much  if  it  does  not  plan  and  provide  means  of  control  over  all  the 
expenditures  for  the  year.  To  be  adequate,  it  must  present  a  complete 
program.  The  form  of  a  summary  statement  showing  a  complete  budget 
program  for  the  current  funds  is  given  in  Table  41  and  it  is  especially 
urged  that  this  summary  form  be  used  in  connection  with  future  budgets. 

With  the  exception  of  these  two  suggestions,  it  seems  that  most 
of  the  recommendations  with  respect  to  the  budget  will  require  changes 
in  the  charter.  Some  of  the  recommended  changes  are  immediately 
necessary  if  the  city  is  to  have  a  real  budget,  while  others  probably  cannot 
be  brought  about  in  the  near  future. 

Budget  Section  in  the  Charter 

The  first  charter  change  which  is  suggested  and  which  is  immediately 
necessary,  is  a  provision  to  give  the  Common  Council  power  to  specify  in 
detail,  and  to  require  it  to  control  the  purposes  for  which  money  is  to  be 
spent  in  each  department,  bureau,  board  or  office;  in  other  words,  to  give 
the  Council  a  real  appropriating  power.  The  present  budget  provisions 
of  the  charter  specify  the  procedure  whereby  the  estimates  shall  be 


66 


presented  to  the  Council  and  imply  that  the  Council  shall  appropriate 
lump  sums  only  to  such  departments,  bureaus,  boards,  or  offices  as  are 
specified  in  the  charter.  These  various  provisions  have  been  interpreted 
to  mean  that  the  Common  Council  can  appropriate  only  a  lump  sum  of 
money  for  each  organization  unit  that  is  named  in  the  charter,  but  that 
it  cannot  in  any  way  specify  the  purpose  for  which  this  money  shall  be 
spent.  For  example,  the  effect  of  this  interpretation  is  that  the  Council 
may  allow  a  million  dollars  for  a  certain  bureau,  but  it  cannot  attach 
any  conditions  to  the  expenditure  of  this  million  dollars,  such  as  that 
certain  parts  of  it  shall  be  spent  for  certain  particular  functions  or  that 
certain  parts  of  it  shall  be  spent  for  certain  objects  (such  as  materials 
and  supplies) ,  or  again  that  certain  parts  of  it  shall  be  spent  in  a  certain 
way  (such  as  for  current  expenses  or  for  redemption  of  debt  or  for  acquisi¬ 
tion  of  property). 

Not  only  should  the  Council  exercise  an  "effective  appropriating 
power,  but  it  should  be  able  to  recognize  in  the  budget  new  administrative 
organizations  or  re-organizations  within  depaitments  named  in  the 
charter,  which  have  been  made  or  which  it  may  be  desirable  to  create 
in  the  future.  The  Council,  in  other  words,  should  not  be  held  down 
to  the  administrative  organization  created  by  the  charter.  A  flexible 
provision  should  be  inserted  to  permit  the  Council  to  accommodate  itself 
to  new  conditions  resulting  from  the  growth  of  the  city  and  other  causes. 

In  addition  to  this,  it  is  recommended  that  the  following  provision 
be  eliminated  from  the  charter:  "When  any  moneys  or  revenues  are 
received  by  the  city  or  any  department,  board  or  officer  thereof,  from 
any  source  other  than  by  municipal  tax  and  which  are  not  otherwise 
appropriated  or  directed  by  law  to  be  applied,  such  moneys  or  revenue 
may  be  used  and  applied  toward  and  in  addition  to  the  funds  appropriated 
as  aforesaid,  in  such  manner  as  the  Board  of  Estimate  and  Apportion¬ 
ment  may  direct.”  (Part  of  Section  63.) 

The  effect  of  this  provision  is  to  give  the  Board  of  Estimate  and 
Apportionment  an  appropriating  power  which  it  should  not  have, 
except  to  the  extent  that  it  should  be  permitted  to  distribute  a  contingent 
fund  (this  is  provided  for  in  another  place  in  the  charter).  A  budget  is 
of  no  effect  if  it  is  easy  for  a  department  or  officer  to  obtain  a  supple¬ 
mental  appropriation  at  any  time.  Supplemental  appropriations  are 
justified  in  emergencies;  if  emergencies  do  occur,  the  supplemental 
appropriations  should  be  granted  whether  there  are  excess  receipts  or 


67 


not.  In  emergency  cases,  also,  it  is  proper  that  the  department  requiring 
the  supplemental  appropriation  should  go  back  to  the  legislative  body 
whence  it  originally  secured  its  budget  allowance. 

Up  until  recent  years  there  usually  was  a  large  amount  of  excess 
receipts  (around  $200,000),  and  the  Board  of  Estimate  and  Apportion¬ 
ment  usually  doled  out  this  amount  to  the  various  departments.  Knowl¬ 
edge  of  this  year-end  procedure  permitted  some  of  the  department  heads 
to  disregard  the  budget  to  a  considerable  extent.  Therefore,  in  order 
to  make  the  budget  really  effective,  it  is  recommended  that  this  power 
to  grant  supplemental  appropriations  be  taken  away  from  the  Board  of 
Estimate  and  Apportionment  and  left  where  it  really  belongs — in  the 
legislative  body.  As  said  before,  supplemental  appropriations  should 
be  governed  by  necessity  and  not  by  excess  of  receipts.  If  the  actual 
miscellaneous  revenues  turn  out  to  be  more  than  the  estimates,  there  is 
created  a  surplus  in  the  current  funds  and  this  surplus  should  be  subject 
to  appropriations  the  following  year. 

Continuing  this  line  of  argument,  it  is  obvious  that  fund  surpluses, 
whether  created  by  excess  receipts  or  unexpended  appropriations,  should 
be  used  as  the  first  resources  of  the  following  year’s  budget  and  should 
not  be  transferred  to  sinking  funds.  It  is  suggested,  therefore,  that  the 
budget  section  of  the  charter  should  include  a  provision  to  make  the 
current  fund  surpluses  available  for  appropriation  the  following  year. 
This  provision,  of  course,  would  go  hand  in  hand  with  the  change  in 
the  sinking  fund  provisions  of  the  charter  recommended  previously. 

The  foregoing  three  charter  changes  are  regarded  as  most  important 
for  the  establishment  of  a  proper  budget  system  to  control  the  current 
funds  of  the  city  and  an  immediate  effort  to  obtain  them  is  urged. 

Other  Charter  Amendments 

Certain  other  charter  amendments  should  be  made  in  the  future 
with  respect  to  a  further  refinement  of  the  budget  procedure.  In  the 
first  place,  the  entire  budget  and  tax  calendar  ought  to  be  shifted  so 
that  the  various  stages  in  the  budget  and  tax  levy  procedure  can  be 
consummated  at  least  two  months  earlier  in  the  fiscal  year.  The  largest 
single  reason  for  advocating  a  change  of  this  kind,  is  the  saving  that 
would  be  effected  in  interest  charges  for  tax  anticipation  notes.  In 
1922,  such  interest  charges  amounted  to  $36,000;  and  borrowing  for 
this  purpose  is  increasing  annually. 


68 


In  the  second  place,  the  scope  of  the  budget  should  be  enlarged  so 
that  it  will  include  not  only  the  current  funds,  but  also  the  loan  funds, 
and  ultimately  the  assessment  funds  as  well.  A  complete  city  budget 
would  include  the  complete  financial  program  showing  the  operations 
of  the  previous  year,  the  financial  condition,  the  work  program  and  the 
financial  program  for  the  coming  year  with  respect  to  every  fund  on  the 
books  of  the  city.  It  is  recognized  that  this  desirable  situation  cannot 
be  forthcoming  immediately,  but  the  recommendation  is  made  with  a 
view  to  setting  up  a  goal  at  which  the  city  may  aim  in  its  budget  progress. 

Incidentally,  it  may  be  mentioned  that  the  constitution  of  the 
pension  funds  of  the  city  is  absolutely  unscientific  since  there  is  no 
relation  between  the  requirements  of  the  pension  funds  and  their  various 
resources,  such  as  fixed  installments  and  certain  specified  miscellaneous 
revenues.  This  objection  applies  equally  to  the  sinking  funds  and  the 
pension  funds.  As  in  the  case  of  the  sinking  funds,  so  in  the  case  of  the 
pension  funds,  it  is  recommended  that  the  charter  provisions  be  changed 
and  that  the  resources  of  the  pension  funds  be  made  to  consist  of  annual 
installments  which  are  actuarially  determined  on  the  basis  of  pension 
experience  tables.  The  pension  funds,  like  all  other  funds,  should  be 
included  in  the  city  budget. 

It  is  further  suggested  that  the  budget  section  of  the  charter  should 
lay  down  the  procedure  for  insertion  in  the  budget  of  estimates  for  fixed 
charges  and  redemption  of  debt.  The  various  fixed  charges,  such  as 
interest,  judgments  and  settlements,  rebates  of  taxes  and  assessments, 
pensions,  taxes,  contributions  and  grants,  reimbursement  of  other 
funds  for  certain  recurring  services  and  the  various  items  of  redemption 
of  debt,  should  be  inserted  in  the  budget  estimates  by  the  Comptroller 
and  information  should  be  given  by  him  supporting  in  detail  the  various 
items  of  debt  service. 

Form  of  the  Budget 

The  classification  of  expenditures  which  until  recently  was  used  in 
the  Comptroller’s  office  gave  an  exceedingly  detailed  analysis  of  all 
claims  according  to  the  character,  function  and  object  of  expenditure. 
The  work  of  each  department  was  divided  into  functions  and  every  function 
was  still  further  divided  into  the  classes:  Administration,  Operation, 
Upkeep,  Fixed  Charges,  Contingencies,  Capital  Outlay  and  Payments  as 
Agent.  Each  one  of  these  classes  was  again  subdivided  into  the  various 
classes  of  object  of  expenditure,  such  as  Personal  Service,  Services  Other 


69 


than  Personal,  Materials  and  Supplies,  and  Equipment.  Before  the 
claims  were  sent  to  the  Comptroller’s  office  by  the  various  departments > 
they  were  coded  according  to  this  elaborate  classification  by  function, 
character  and  object.  In  the  Comptroller’s  office  the  expenditures  were 
analyzed  by  means  of  the  Hollerith  Tabulating  Machine  system.  The 
analysis  of  expenditures  was  recorded  on  both  detail  and  summary  sheets 
by  the  Comptroller,  showing  monthly,  quarterly  and  yearly  totals. 

This  system  of  classifying  expenditures  was  capable  of  yielding 
almost  any  kind  of  information  desired  regarding  expenditures  and  was 
capable  of  sorting  the  claims  in  a  half  dozen  different  ways  if  necessary- 
But  the  experience  of  the  Comptroller’s  office  was  that  the  information 
obtained  by  this  system  was  not  used  to  any  large  extent  either  by  the 
department  heads  or  by  the  budget  committee  of  the  Board  of  Estimate 
and  Apportionment.  This  situation  was  due  partly  to  the  fact  that 
the  classification  was  in  some  respects  too  refined,  and  partly  to  the 
fact  that  it  did  not  tie  up  well  with  the  appropriation  act.  It  will  be 
remembered  from  the  discussion  of  the  budget  procedure  in  Part  I  of 
this  report  that  the  budget  appropriation  is  extremely  lump  sum  in  its 
itemization,  and  that  no  control  is  therefore  exercised  over  the  expenditure 
of  money  either  as  to  function  or  character  or  object  of  expenditure. 
The  remedy  for  the  situation  seemed  to  be  to  create  a  closer  relation 
between  the  budget  appropriation  and  the  expenditure  classification- 
The  appropriation  had  not  been  segregated  sufficiently,  while  the  ex¬ 
penditure  analysis  seemed  to  have  been  segregated  too  much.  The 
remedy,  to  put  it  in  another  way,  could  be  found  by  introducing  an 
element  of  segregation  into  the  appropriation  ordinance  on  the  one  hand, 
and  by  eliminating  some  of  the  refined  segregation  in  the  expenditure 
analysis  on  the  other  hand. 

In  answer  to  a  request  from  the  Comptroller,  this  elaborate  expendi¬ 
ture  analysis  was  revised  by  the  accounting  staff  of  the  Bureau,  and 
also  at  the  same  time  the  form  of  the  appropriation  ordinance  was 
changed.  Several  changes  have  been  made  in  the  existing  classification 
and  certain  compromises  have  been  made,  which  seem  to  meet  the 
practical  exigencies  of  the  city.  In  changing  the  analysis  of  expenditures 
and  the  form  of  the  appropriation  act,  certain  principles  were  adhered  to: 
first,  that  classification  by  object,  by  character  and  by  function  should 
not  be  mixed  up,  but  should  be  properly  interrelated;  second,  that  classi¬ 
fication  by  object  should  not  be  an  indiscriminate  list  of  objects  pur¬ 
chased  in  the  different  departments,  but  should  be  a  more  or  less  logical 


70 


arrangement  of  the  whole  field  of  objects  into  a  number  of  groups,  in¬ 
clusive  enough  to  cover  practically  the  entire  field  of  possible  expendi¬ 
tures;  third,  that  segregation  in  the  appropriation  ordinance  should  go  so 
far  at  least  as  to  separate  expenditures  of  a  different  character  or  function. 
For  example,  current  expenses  should  be  separated  from  acquisition  of 
property,  etc. ;  and  if  the  current  expenses  of  a  department  or  bureau  are 
divided  among  several  large,  distinctive  functions,  such  separate  functions 
should  call  for  separate  items  in  the  appropriation  act. 

In  making  a  revision  of  the  expenditure  analysis,  the  appropriation 
ordinance  and  budget  estimate  sheets  were  changed  so  as  to  enable 
adherence  to  these  principles.  The  revision  which  was  made  is  ad¬ 
mittedly  temporary  and  experimental,  but  it  is  thought  that  the  changes 
are  in  the  right  direction  and  they  will  afford  a  larger  element  of  control 
over  the  expenditure  of  budget  money. 

The  revised  classification  of  expenditures  has  the  same  general 
framework  as  that  used  in  connection  with  the  Hollerith  Tabulating 
system.  It  was  proposed  that  expenditures  be  analyzed  primarily  by 
funds,  secondarily  by  organization  units,  then  by  character  of  expendi¬ 
ture,  then  by  function  and  lastly  by  object.  The  primary  analysis 
distributes  all  budget  expenditures  in  four  funds — general,  school,  water 
and  market.  The  classification  by  organization  units  is  the  same  as 
that  formerly  in  use,  except  that  recognition  is  given  to  the  adminis¬ 
trative  unit  in  the  Department  of  Public  Works  called  the  Bureau  of 
Sanitation,  which  has  previously  been  included  in  the  Bureau  of  Streets 
and  Sewers.  The  third  analysis  distributes  all  expenditures  into  four 
classes  by  character:  Current  Expenses,  Fixed  Charges,  Acquisition  of 
Property,  Redemption  of  Debt. 

The  refined  analysis  by  function  has  been  dropped  for  the  present 
because  of  the  small  use  made  of  this  information  and  the  labor  involved 
in  obtaining  it.  The  point  is  made,  however,  that  it  is  desirable  to 
preserve  in  a  classification  of  expenditures  an  analysis  by  function  pro¬ 
vided  the  functional  divisions  are  large  and  distinctive.  The  goal 
which  the  city  should  try  to  reach  in  respect  to  a  functional  classifica¬ 
tion  is  to  embody  the  functions  in  the  administrative  organization  of 
the  different  bureaus  and  offices.  For  example,  if  a  bureau  is  per¬ 
forming  four  large  and  distinctive  functions,  the  best  way  for  obtaining 
an  adequate  functional  classification  is  to  create  within  the  bureau  four 
divisions  or  minor  administrative  units.  In  view  of  the  fact  that  the 


71 


organization  units  of  the  city  are  not  now  completely  premised  on  func¬ 
tional  lines,  a  tentative  functional  analysis  was  proposed  for  two  or  three 
departments.  These  departments  are  the  City  Engineer’s  office,  the 
Health  Bureau  and  the  Department  of  Public  Works.  In  the  City  En¬ 
gineer’s  office,  it  was  suggested  that  the  Testing  Laboratory  be  separated 
from  the  other  functions  of  the  office,  as  Municipal  Buildings  and  City 
Planning  have  already  been  separated.  In  the  Health  Bureau,  it  was 
suggested  that  the  Municipal  Hospital  be  separated  from  the  function  of 
General  Health  Service.  In  the  Department  of  Public  Works  recognition 
was  given  to  the  Bureau  of  Sanitation,  the  organization  of  which  has  been 
divided  into  four  functions,  namely — Supervision,  Street  Cleaning, 
Refuse  Collection  and  Refuse  Disposal.  The  work  that  remains  to  be 
done  by  the  Bureau  of  Streets  and  Sewers  was  divided  into  two  functions; 
Highway  Maintenance  and  Operation,  and  Maintenance  and  Operation 
of  Sewage  System.  Outside  of  these  three  cases,  no  further  functional 
analysis  was  proposed.  With  the  exception  of  the  Department  of 
Public  Works,  these  changes  have  been  carried  out  by  the  city.  Most 
of  the  smaller  departments  are  concerned  mainly  with  only  one  large 
function  and  it  is  felt  that  a  further  functional  classification  should  be 
dictated  by  the  experience  of  the  future. 

It  will  be  seen  from  the  foregoing  that  almost  the  entire  functional 
analysis  under  the  old  system  has  been  dropped.  Some  changes  have 
also  been  made  in  the  classification  of  objects  of  expenditure.  The  same 
primary  titles  were  retained,  but  the  sub-classifications  of  Materials 
and  Supplies  and  Equipment  have  been  revised.  It  was  the  desire  of  the 
Comptroller  to  make  his  analysis  of  expenditures  by  the  old  method  of 
columnar  analysis  and  to  obviate  the  necessity  of  using  the  Hollerith 
Tabulating  machines.  In  order  to  accomplish  this  end,  it  was  necessary 
that  all  analyses  except  one  be  embodied  in  the  appropriation  ordinance. 
The  proposal  was  made,  therefore,  that  analysis  by  funds,  organization 
units,  character  and  function  (only  the  few  functions  mentioned  above) 
be  included  in  the  appropriation  ordinance  and  that  the  analysis  by  object 
be  made  outside  of  the  appropriation  ordinance. 

Attention  should  be  called  to  the  functional  classification  in  this 
respect:  “Current  Expenses”  is  the  only  character  class  which  has  been 
divided  into  functions;  the  character  classes  of  Fixed  Charges,  Acquisition 
of  Property  and  Redemption  of  Debt  have  not  been  divided  into 
functions. 


72 


The  form  recommended  for  that  part  of  the  appropriation  ordinance 
which  relates  to  this  itemization  is  shown  in  Table  42.  It  will  be  seen 
from  an  inspection  of  this  table  that  within  each  department  there  is  at 
least  one  item  for  Current  Expenses  and  also  one  item,  if  necessary,  for 
Acquisition  of  Property.  There  is  an  item  for  each  particular  fixed  charge 
expenditure  and  an  item  for  each  kind  of  redemption  of  debt  expenditure. 
The  appropriation  ordinance  exercises  no  control  over  the  expenditure  of 
an  item  for  Current  Expenses  as  between  the  various  objects  such  as 
personal  services,  services  other  than  personal,  etc.,  except  such  control 
as  is  exercised  through  the  salary  schedule. 

Reference  has  already  been  made  to  the  Corporation  Counsel’s 
interpretation  of  the  charter  to  the  effect  that  the  Common  Council 
cannot  hold  the  department  heads  to  such  an  itemization  as  has  been 
made  in  this  table.  To  remedy  the  situation  in  a  thorough  manner 
and  to  give  the  Council  a  real  budget-making  power,  a  charter  amend¬ 
ment  is  necessary.  This  proposal  has  been  discussed  above.  It  seems 
desirable,  however,  that  this  form  of  the  appropriation  ordinance  be 
accepted  by  common  consent  and  the  complete  plan  be  followed  in  future 
budgets,  in  anticipation  of  the  necessary  charter  change,  and  in  order  that 
a  proper  basis  of  comparison  may  be  established  for  future  budgets.  If 
it  is  felt  that  a  strict  interpretation  of  the  charter  will  not  allow  the  inclu¬ 
sion  of  the  suggested  itemization  in  the  appropriation  ordinance,  the 
Board  of  Estimate  and  Apportionment  can  stipulate,  extra-legally,  that 
the  Comptroller  shall  set  up  his  appropriation  accounts  on  the  proposed 
basis,  and  that  the  departments  in  their  spending  shall  adhere  to  such 
itemization  unless  changes  are  authorized  by  the  Board. 

Estimate  sheets  have  been  prepared  for  the  Comptroller  for  use  in 
obtaining  departmental  estimates  on  the  basis  of  the  classification  used 
in  the  suggested  appropriation  ordinance.  The  estimate  sheets  include 
the  further  analysis  of  the  current  expense  items  by  object.  This  further 
analysis  is  for  information  only  and  is  not  to  be  included  in  the  appropria¬ 
tion  ordinance.  As  was  stated  above,  both  the  budget  estimate  sheets 
and  the  appropriation  ordinance  have  been  divided  into  four  parts 
according  to  funds.  A  summary  of  the  budget  estimates  and  of  the 
appropriation  items  by  funds  and  character  of  expenditure  should  be 
presented  by  the  Board  of  Estimate  and  Apportionment  to  the  Council 
along  with  its  other  budget  statements.  Such  a  summary  foim  has  beeft 
referred  to  previously  and  is  shown  in  Table  41.  This  table  not  only 


summarizes  the  budget  estimates  and  the  appropriation  items  under  the 
heading  of  “Planned  Expenditures,”  but  also  shows  the  “Means  of 
Financing”  the  same. 

It  is  felt  that  the  information  which  has  been  given  both  to  the 
budget  committee  of  the  Board  of  Estimate  and  Apportionment  and  to 
the  public  with  respect  to  the  annual  budget  has  been  entirely  too  meager. 
The  budget  reports  should  include  not  only  balance  sheets,  operating 
statements,  and  other  financial  statements  of  the  Comptroller’s  office, 
but  also  progress  reports  and  the  detailed  work  programs  of  the  different 
departments.  It  is,  therefore,  suggested:  first,  that  the  departmental 
estimates  be  printed  in  detail  for  public  information;  second,  that  the 
charter  provision  on  annual  reports  (requiring  each  department  head  to 
submit  an  annual  report  to  the  Mayor  not  later  than  December  31st 
each  year)  be  enforced;  third,  that  these  annual  reports  be  considered 
by  the  Board  of  Estimate  and  Apportionment  in  revising  the  budget 
requests  and  transmitted  to  the  Common  Council  as  a  part  of  the  budget 
information;  fourth,  that  the  Board  of  Estimate  and  Apportionment 
require  a  summary  work  program  for  the  coming  year  from  each  depart¬ 
ment  head  and  that  these  work  programs  also  be  transmitted  to  the 
Council  as  budget  information. 


m  LIBRARY 
OF  THE 

IWV'RSITY  0?  MI.IMOIS 


Tax 

Bill 

No. 

Namlents  of  Amount  of  Item 

Fund  Credited 

Taxes 

1 

Prope}-Rate  not  over  $20.00  a 
l  for  G.  M.  E. 

General 

2 

Water 

Tax 

kax  of  3  cents  fixed  by 

Water 

Delin¬ 

quent 

Ac¬ 

counts 

2 

Delinc 

Acc< 

lus  interest,  at  10% 
rom  time  due  till  June  1, 

Water 

9 
& 

10 

Delinc 

Impro 

Asse 

a.1  plus 

>  to  time  install,  is  due 
¥0  from  time  install,  is  due 
.  following 

Local 

Improvement 

8 

Delinc 
E.  S 
Asse 

al  plus 

3  to  time  install,  is  due 
¥0  from  time  intall.  is  due 
.  following 

E.  S.  T.  S. 

6 

Delinc 

wall 

Clea 

-D 

arge  plus  flat  penalty  of 

General 

6 

Delinq 
Safety 
Accc 
— D 

arge  plus  flat  penalty  of 

General 

Direct 

Assess¬ 

ments 

3 

Direct 
for  c 
Stre< 
Sprii 
— 

■* 

:tors’  estimates 
ion  charges,  D.  P.  W. 

;  (4J4% — time  of  middle 
me  1) 

  .  

Local 

Improvement 

4 

Direct  ttors’  estimates 
for  ct  (43^% — time  of  middle 

Extrine  1) 

Local 

Improvement 

7 

Direct  ctors’  estimates 
for  qion  charges,  D.  P.  W. 

Sno\jt  (434% — time  of  middle 

Line  1) 

Local 

Improvement 

5 

Direct  ctors’  estimates  and 
for  ord|>n  or 

C.  &ment  Cost 

Tree .14%  end  of  year  to  June  1 

Local 

Improvement 

TABLE  No.  1 

TAX  ROLL  ITEMS 


THE  LIBRARY 
OF  THE 

UHW.RSi*  Y  t'-:  fTUWOlS 


Tax 

Bill 

No. 

Name  of  Item 

Legal  References 

Accounts  Kept 

By 

When  Reported 
to  Assessors 

Placed  on  Rolls 

Components  of  Amount  of  Item 

Fund  Credited 

When 

By 

Taxes 

1  1 

Property  Tax 

State  Const. — 

Art.  8,  §  10 

State  Tax  Law 
Charter 

City  Clerk 

April  1, 

(Charter  §  107) 

April  1,  20 

Assessors 

Tax  Levy — Rate  not  over  $20.00  a 
thousand  for  G.  M.  E. 

General 

2  1 

Water  Frontage 
Tax 

Charter  Sec.  109 
Sec.  172 
Sec.  188 
Sec.  272 

Detail — Water 
Bureau 
Summary — 
Comptroller 

On  or  before 
March  1 

On  or  before 
April  1 

Assessors 

Frontage  Tax  of  3  cents  fixed  by 
Charter 

Water 

Delin¬ 

quent 

Ac¬ 

counts 

2 

Delinquent  Water 
Accounts 

Charter  Sec.  172 
Sec.  188 
Sec.  271 

Detail — W  ater 
Bureau 
Summary — 
Comptroller 

On  or  before 
March  1 

On  or  before 
April  1 

Assessors 

Principal  plus  interest,  at  10% 
annum  from  time  due  till  June  1, 
following 

Water 

9 
& 

10 

Delinquent  Local 

Improvement 

Assessments 

Sec.  172 
Sec.  176 

Detail — 

Treasurer 
Summary — 
Comptroller 

On  or  before 
May  1 

Treasurer 

(1)  Principal  plus 

(2)  Int.  6%  to  time  install,  is  due 

(3)  Int.  10%  from  time  install,  is  due 
to  June  1  following 

Local 

Improvement 

8 

Delinquent 

E.  S.  T.  S. 
Assessments 

Charter  Sec.  118 
Sec.  172 
Sec.  176 

- 1 - 

Detail — 

Treasurer 
Summary — 
Comptroller 

On  or  before 
May  1 

Treasurer 

(1)  Principal  plus 

(2)  Int.  6%  to  time  install,  is  due 

(3)  Int.  10%  from  time  intall.  is  due 
to  June  1  following 

E.  S.  T.  S. 

6 

Delinquent  Side¬ 
walk  Repair  anc. 
Cleaning  Accts. 
— D.  P.  W. 

Charter  Sec.  254 

Detail — D.  P.  W. 
Summary — 
Comptroller 

On  or  before 
March  1 

On  or  before 
April  1 

Assessors 

Original  charge  plus  flat  penalty  of 

10% 

General 

6 

Delinquent  Public 
Safety 

Accounts 
— D.  P.  S. 

Charter  Sec.  188 
Sub.  4 

Detail — D.  P.  S. 
Summary — 
Comptroller 

On  or  before 
March  1 

On  or  before 
April  1 

Assessors 

Original  charge  plus  flat  penalty  of 

10% 

General 

Direct 

Assess¬ 

ments 

3 

Direct  Assessment 
for  ordinance 
Street 
Sprinkling 

Charter  Sec.  146 
Sec.  188 
(See  C.  C.  Proc. 
1919—138) 

Detail — D.  P.  W. 

Comptroller 
Summary — 
Comptroller 

On  or  before 
March  1 

On  or  before 
April  1 

Assessors 

(1)  Contractors’  estimates 

(2)  Inspection  charges,  D.  P.  W. 

(3)  Interest  (4 )4% — time  of  middle 
est.  to  June  1) 

Local 

Improvement 

4 

Direct  Assessment 
for  ordinance 
Extra  Lighting 

Charter  Sec.  146 
Sec.  188 
(See  C.  C.  Proc. 
1919-215,  273; 
1917-258) 

Detail — Eng. 

Comptroller 
Summary — 
Comptroller 

On  or  before 
March  1 

On  or  before 
April  1 

Assessors 

(1)  Contractors’  estimates 

(2)  Interest  (4  )4% — time  of  middle 
est.  to  June  1) 

Local 

Improvement 

7 

Direct  Assessment 
for  ordinance 
Snow  Removal 

;  Charter  Sec.  146 
Sec.  188 
(See  C.  C.  Proc. 
1919—304) 

Detail — D.  P.  W. 

Comptroller 
Summary — 
Comptroller 

On  or  before 
March  1 

On  or  before 
April  1 

Assessors 

(1)  Contractors’  estimates 

(2)  Inspection  charges,  D.  P.  W. 

(3)  Interest  (4)4% — time  of  middle 
est.  to  June  1) 

Local 

Improvement 

5 

Direct  Assessment 
for  ordinance 

C.  &  E.  and 
Tree  Planting 

Charter  Sec.  146 
Sec.  188 
(See  C.  C.  Proc. 
1919—105) 

Detail — Park 
Department 
Summary — 
Comptroller 

On  or  before 
March  1 

Or  on  before 
April  1 

Assessors 

(1)  Contractors’  estimates  and 
Inspection  or 

(2)  Department  Cost 

(3)  Int. — 4)4%  end  of  year  to  June  1 

Local 

Improvement 

(74) 


u  **«  * 


4  itlfc 


- 


TABLE  No.  2 

LICENSES 


Occupation  Licensed 


Legal  Authority 


Auctioneer . |  General  State  Law  (Charter-Specific) 

General  City  Law 
Section  19,  20  Sec.  86 


Billposter .  'General  J5tate  Law 

Cartman . |  GeneraLState  Law 

(Charter-Specific) 

Employment  Agency. .  |  General  State  Law  (Sec.  86) 

(Charter-Specific) 

Grower . |  General  State  Law  (Sec.  86) 

Huckster,  Horse  and  I  (Charter-Specific) 

Wagon . I  General  State  Law  (Sec.  86  and  335) 

Junk  Dealer,  Horse  I  (Charter-Specific) 

and  Wagon .  General  State  Law  (Sec.  86  and  335) 


Junk  Dealer,  Push  I  (Charter-Specific) 

Cart .  General  State  Law  (Sec.  86  and  335) 


(Licensed  Occupation 
Ordinance) 


(Licensed  Occupation 
Ordinance) 


(Licensed  Occupation 
Ordinance) 


(Licensed  Occupation 
Ordinance) 

(Licensed  Occupation 
Ordinance) 

(Licensed  Occupation 
Ordinance) 


(Licensed  Occupation 
Ordinance) 


(Licensed  Occupation 
Ordinance) 


Junk  Dealer,  Store.. . 

Moving  Picture 
Machine  Operator. 


(Charter-Specific) 

General  State  Law  (Sec.  86  and  335) 

(State  Law-Specific) 

General  State  Law  (General  City  Law — Sec.  18) 


(Licensed  Occupation 
Ordinance) 


Pawnbroker . 

Peddler,  Push  Cart. 


Peddler,  Foot.  . . 
Picture  Theatre. 


Pool,  Billiards  and 
Bowling . 


Shows  and  Circuses. 

Secondhand  Dealers . 

Theatres . 

Milk  Dealer . 


(Charter-Specific) 
General  State  Law  (Sec.  86  and  335) 

(Charter-Specific) 
General  State  Law  (Sec.  86) 


(Charter-Specific) 
General  State  Law  (Sec.  86) 

(Charter-Specific) 
General  State  Law  (JSec.  336) 

(Charter-Specific) 
General  State  Law  (JSec.  335) 


(Charter-Specific) 
General  State  Law  (JSec.  336) 


General  State  Law 


(Licensed  Occupation 
Ordinance) 

(Licensed  Occupation 
Ordinance) 


(Licensed  Occupation 
Ordinance) 

(Licensed  Occupation 
Ordinance) 

(Licensed  Occupation 
Ordinance) 


(Licensed  Occupation 
Ordinance) 


(Licensed  Occupation 
Ordinance) 


(Charter-Specific)  (Licensed  Occupation 
General  State  Law  (JSec.  336)  Ordinance) 


Ice  Dealer . 

Scavenger . 

Plumber . 

Stationary  Engineer. 


Hoist  and  Portable 
Engineer . 


General  State  Law 

General  State  Law 
General  State  Law 


(Health  Ordinance) 

(Health  Ordinance) 
(Health  Ordinance) 


(Otate  L/dW-opcuuv-;  \ 

General  State  Law  (Gen’l.  City  Law,  Sec.  40-57)  of  Plumbers) 
General  State  La.  (Eng.  Lienee  Ord.na, 


Hunter’s  Licenses .... 

Marriage  Licenses.  .  .  . 
Shooting  Galleries 

Midwives . 

Dog  Licenses . 

Motor  Cabmen . 


Motor  Cab  Drivers.  .  . 
Omnibus . 


General  State  Law 
State  Law-Specific  (Cons.  Law — Sec.  185) 

State-Specific  (Domestic  Rel.  Law  Art.  Ill) 

Charter 

Charter 

State  Law  (Art.  5-B  Agricultural  Law) 
General  State  Law 


Section  1-18) 


Motor  Cab  Stand. 


General  State  Law 
General  State  Law 

General  State  Law 


(Motor  Cab  and  Motor 
Stand  Ordinance) 

(Motor  Cab  and  Motor 
Stand  Ordinance) 

(Omnibus  Ordinances) 

(Motor  Cab  and  Motor 
Stand  Ordinance) 


*0  25  and  $0.50  fees  are  revenue  of  city.  Regular  fee  is  state  revenue  and  is  turned  over  monthly  by  clerk  to  county  clerk  who  disposes  of  it  as  follows: 

(1)  retains  4%  as  own  compensation.  .  .  ,  „  tn  statP  treasurer 

2)  transmits  rest  to  conservation  commission  which  in  turn  transmits  to  state  treasurer. 

“County  Treasurer  receives  $1.00  and  City  Treasurer  receives  $1.00 
***$0.25  registration  fee  is  revenue  of  city.  Regular  fee  is  disposed  of  as  follows. 

(1)  $0.25  fee  to  assessors  for  listing  dogs. 

(2)  10%  monthly  to  state  treasurer. 

(3)  45%  monthly  to  county  treasurer. 

(4)  45%  monthly  to  city  treasurer, 
t Refers  only  to  disposition  of  revenue. 


Authorized  by  L 

icense  Issued  by 

Fee 

Collected  by 

License 
Inspected  by 

Rate  of  Fee 

Term  of 

License 

1922 

Collections 

Number 

Issued 

Disposition 

of  Revenue 

Mayor  C 

License  Officer 

Dity  Clerk 

Treasurer 

Police 

$50.00 

—Dec.  31  « 

700.00 

14 

General  Fund 

Mayor 

License  Officer 

Hity  Clerk 

Treasurer 

Police 

20.00 

1.00  sign 

— Dec.  31 

360.00 

18.00 

18 

18 

General  Fund 

Mayor 

Treasurer 

Police 

1.00 

1.00  sign 

— Dec.  31 

117.00 

117 

General  Fund 

License  Officer 

City  Clerk 

117.00 

117 

Mayor 

License  Officer 

City  Clerk 

Treasurer 

Police 

25.00 

— Dec.  31 

175.00 

7 

General  Fund 

Mayor 

Market  Master 

City  Clerk 

City  Clerk 

Police 

1.00 

— Apr.  30 

General  Fund 

$5.00  of  each  fee  to 

Mayor 

Market  Master 

City  Clerk 

Treasurer 

Police 

40.00 

1.00  sign 

— Apr.  30 

40.00 

1.00 

1 

1 

Police  Pension  Fund 
$35.00  to  Market  Fund 

Mayor 

Treasurer 

Police 

3.00 

1.00  sign 

— Dec.  31 

231.00 

77 

Police  Pension  Fund — - 

License  Officer 

City  Clerk 

77.00 

77 

Charter 

Mayor 

Police 

1.00 

1.00  sign 

— Dec.  31 

12.00 

12 

Police  Pension  Fund — - 

License  Officer 

City  Clerk 

Treasurer 

12.00 

12 

Charter 

Police  Pension  Fund — 

Mayor 

License  Officer 

City  Clerk 

Treasurer 

Police 

25.00 

— Dec.  31 

275.00 

11 

Charter 

Mayor 

City  Clerk 

Treasurer 

Police 

5.00  Original 

2.00  Renewal 

Year  after 
date 

178.85 

5— $5.00 
78— $2.00 

General  Fund 

Police  Pension  Fund — 

Mayor 

License  Officer 

City  Clerk 

Treasurer 

Police 

100.00 

— Dec.  31 

1,100.00 

11 

Charter 

Mayor 

License  Officer 

City  Clerk 

Treasurer 

Police 

15.00 

1.00  sign 

— Dec.  31 

795.00 

53 

53 

General  Fund 

Mayor 

License  Officer 

City  Clerk 

Treasurer 

Police 

5.00 

— Dec.  31 

255.00 

51 

General  Fund 

Mayor 

License  Officer 

City  Clerk 

Treasurer 

Police 

50.00 

— Dec.  31 

1,350.00 

27 

Fire  Pension 

Police  Pension  Fund 

Com.  Public 

Safety  License 
Officer 

City  Clerk 

Treasurer 

Police 

5.00  per  table 

5.00  1  and  2  alleys 
2.00  each  over  2 

— Aug.  31 

3,109.00 

216 

prior  to  Sept.  1,  1922. 
General  Fund  after 
Sept.  1,  1922 

Fire  Pension  Fund — - 

Mayor 

License  Officer 

City  Clerk 

Treasurer 

Police 

75.00  perform. 

500.00  year 

— Dec.  31 

Charter 

5.00  day  Museum 
10.00  day  Concert 

Mayor 

License  Officer 

City  Clerk 

Treasurer 

Police 

2.00 

— Dec.  31 

228.00 

114 

General  Fund 

Mayor 

License  Officer 

Fire  Pension  Fund— 

City  Clerk 

Treasurer 

Police 

50.00 

— Dec.  31 

300.00 

6 

Charter 

Health 

Bureau 

Health 

Bureau 

Health 

Bureau 

Health 

Bureau 

2.00  Store 

1.00  Vehicle 

1.00  Sign 

— Dec.  31 

1,409.00 

General  Fund 

Health 

Health 

Health 

1.00  Vehicle 

— Dec.  31 

190.00 

General  Fund 

Bureau 

Bureau 

Bureau 

Bureau 

1.00  Sign 

Health 

Health 

Health 

10.00 

— Dec.  31 

General  Fund 

Bureau 

Bureau 

Bureau 

Bureau 

1.00  Sign 

Examining  Board 

Health 

Examining  Board 

Health 

5.00 

Indefinite 

255.00 

General  Fund 

of  Plumbers 

Bureau 

of  Plumbers 

Bureau 

Board  Examiners 
e  of  Stationary 
Engineers 

Board  Examiner 
Stationary  Engi 
neers,  Counter¬ 
signed  by  City 
Clerk 

s  Treasurer 

Police-Board 

Examiners 

Stationary 

Engineers 

Chief  and  1st,  $3.00 
and  $2.00;  2d  and 

3d,  $2.00  and  $1.00 
Nightwatch,  $1.00 
and  $1.00 

— Dec.  31 

1,648.00 

General  Fund 

Board  Examiners 
e  of  Stationary 

Board  Examiner 
Stationary  Engi 

s  Treasurer 

Police-Board 

Examiners 

1st,  $3.00  and  $2.00; 
2d,  $2.00  and  $1.00 

— Dec.  31 

1,648.00 

General  Fund 

Engineers 

neers,  Counter- 

Stationary 

signed  by  City 
Clerk 

Engineers 

City  Clerk 

City  Clerk 

*  .25  Res.  Hunter 
.50  Non  Res. 

.50  Non  Res.  Fisher 

— Dec.  31 

331.75 

General  Fund 

Affidavit  of 

City  Clerk 

2.00** 

3,106.15 

General  Fund 

Parties 

City  Clerk 

Police  Pension 

10.00 

Customary 

Mayor 

License  Officer 

City  Clerk 

Treasurer 

Police 

— Dec.  31 

None 

Fund 

Board  Examiners 
Midwives 

Board  Examine 
Midwives 

rs 

Treasurer 

Health 

Bureau 

10.00 

Indefinite 

10.00 

1 

General  Fund 

***  .25  per  tag 

— June  30 

City  Clerk 

City  Clerk 

City  Clerk 

Assessor 

(to  city) 

Com.  Pub.  Safety 
License  Officer 

C.  of  P.  S. 

Treasurer 

C.  of  P.  S. 

7.50—4  cyl. 

10.00 — over  4  cyl. 

— June  30 

120.00 

440.00 

16 

44 

General  Fund 

General  Fund 

Com.  Pub.  Safety 
License  Officer 

C.  of  P.  S. 

Treasurer 

C.  of  P.  S. 

5.00  original 

3.00  renewal 

— June  30 

320.00 

64 

General  Fund 

General  Fund 

Com.  Council 

City  Clerk 

City  Clerk 

City  Clerk 

10.00 

Indefinite 

100.00 

10 

General  Fund 

Com.  Pub.  Safety 
License  Officer 

C.  of  P.  S. 

Treasurer 

C.  of  P.  S. 

1.00 

— June  3C 

General  Fund 

NIZATION  UNITS 


916 

1917 

191 

i  345.61 

$  12  520.00 

$  15  4 

720.00 

720.00 

7: 

270.00 

500.00 

51 

;  500.00 

19  434.00 

5  9' 

:  089.11 

4  494.33 

4  9: 

i  856.08 

35  426.79 

38  3: 

667.50 

28  418.00 

42  41 

617.97 

28  445.40 

33  4i 

506 . 02 

326  268.49 

352  1 

1  224.52 

8  2, 

246.63 

315.00 

1  7 

628.84 

40  232.83 

33  6! 

752.43 

1  268.35 

1  4:i 

685.98 

41  204.26 

47  41 

744.25 

16  000.00 

19  8' 

033.57 

32  919.45 

32  6 

671.86 

4  759.96 

5  2 

529.35 

13  016.68 

12  2i 

075.95 

21  713.53 

24  5 

644.03 

13  112.85 

13  71 

212.40 

50  870.43 

60  8 

606.04 

127  763.68 

172.1 

436.11 

576  195.92 

646  9 

681.19 

545  667.64 

625  0 

425.81 

17  211.29 

17  6 

335.61 

1  214.19 

1  1 

365.50 

360.00 

3 

40.00 

468.60 

1  713  107.77 

2  096  8 

932.23 

165  852.92 

208  3 

483.97 

5  314.59 

5  9 

236.38 

72  469.25 

83  2 

381.27 

4  938.03 

5  8 

731.72 

176  892.39 

188  2' 

827.31 

81  635.55 

89  7 

737.66 

750.00 

7 

767.64 

149  719.04 

175  6, 

698.42 

27  000.00 

24  7 

983.04 

7  122.79 

7  2 

057.06 

1  294  749.08 

1  490  8 

436.99 

18  105.34 

17  1 

905.32 

2  000.00 

17  6 

628.24 

8  156.47 

8  6 

286 . 18 

363  591.87 

376  5 

373.40 

447  755.02 

463  7 

271.08 

7  246.14 

8  4 

480.00 

4  480.00 

3  6 

535.87 

89  216.52 

99  8 

167.35 

127  459.67 

141  1 

2  6 

077.57 

$6  728  840.03 

$7  735.0 

TABLE  No.  3 


BUDGET  EXPENDITURES  ANALYZED  BY  ORGANIZATION  UNITS 

(1910  to  1922  inc.) 


1910 

1911 

1912 

1913 

1914 

1915 

Mayor’s  Office . Jj 

&  10  834.90 

10  908.91 

720  00 

11  241  87 

11.186.11 

14  512.99 

10  237.12 

Society  for  the  Prevention  of  Cruelty  to 
Children . 

720 . 00 

720 . 00 

720 . 00 

720.00 

720.00 

Board  of  Estimate  and  Apportionment . 

129.30 

225.40 

256.10 

313.50 

280.50 

168.00 

Contingent  Fund  .  . 

Board  of  Contract  and  Supply . 

3  845.10 

4  396  90 

4  668.80 

4  465.72 

4  472.97 

4  151.14 

Common  Council  and  City  Clerk . 

37  994.50 

33  707  17 

33  888.28 

34  564.59 

38  002.80 

37  587.67 

Election  Expenses . 

16  699.00 

14  054.00 

31  390.00 

24  831.50 

42  822.41 

35  772.50 

Comptroller’s  Office . . 

22  715.31 

22  611.40 

23  966.48 

24  238.47 

24  725.92 

24  177.85 

Debt  Service — General . 

96  834.60 

125  002.17 

130  003.38 

166  356.33 

169  177.22 

246  412.07 

Judgments  and  Settlements . 

3  128.04 

4  852.92 

8  006.65 

8  074.92 

8  825.09 

5  338.61 

Department  of  Law . 

22  098.05 

22  431.22 

25  238.94 

24.375.71 

25  825.90 

25  516.79 

Art.  r.nmmi^inn 

24.00 

Treasurer’s  Office . 

30  615.49 

31  000.04 

33  859.39 

36  368.78 

36  077.42 

36  552.84 

Rebates,  Taxes  and  Assessments . 

15  038.64 
48  000  00 

10  000.00 
30  342  62 

20  000.00 

18  830.49 

5  652.57 

12  381.88 

17  000  00 

17  000  00 

19  271.88 

Department  of  Assessment  and  Taxation.  . .  . 
Civil  Service  Commission . 

23  410.84 

4  030.40 

22  823.64 

4  449.27 

25  875.85 

4  342.95 

26  186.19 

4  408.36 

28  382.65 

3  863.43 

25  685.19 

4  023.61 

Oitv  Court — Criminal  Branch . 

12  524.63 

11  178.55 

11  775.69 

11  843.06 

12  072.85 

12  267.52 

Citv  Court — Civil  Branch. . 

12  407.02 

12  575.28 

15  356.63 

15  415.78 

15  687.75 

15  781.16 

Department  of  Public  Safety — Commis¬ 
sioner’s  Office  . . 

11  072.95 

11  146.33 

12  770.00 

12  667.53 

12  652.13 

12  598.83 

Blirpaii  of  TTealt.h  . 

66  147.74 

73  982.87 

91  044.61 

79  067.99 

90  871.75 

94  849.01 

Bureau  of  Fire  . 

437  245.29 

535  885.75 

485  863.90 

509  791.56 

548  940.81 

540  028.42 

Birrpnn  nf  BnliPP  . 

365  963.62 

384  135.44 

431  438.67 

458  229.49 

478  973.02 

504  999.38 

Biirppii  nf  BiiilHinP'.s . 

13  633.33 

13  349.12 

14  454.51 

16  033.08 

16  534.07 

16  108.34 

TTvaminincr  BnnrH  nf  Bllimhers . 

1  373.68 

1  355.96 

1  281.56 

1  404.13 

1  317.44 

1  255.21 

Examining  Board  of  Stationary  Engineers.  .  . 
T^Y^miriincr  Roard  of  TvTidwiferv . 

366.50 

80.00 

374.35 

80.00 

361.45 

60.00 

360.00 

100.00 

360.00 

130.00 

391.25 

130.00 

Department  of  Public  Instruction — General. . 
Department  of  Public  Instruction — Debt 

Rprtn  pp  . 

1  041  649.36 

* 

1  121  612.92 

* 

1  227  523.08 

* 

1  245  865.22 

48  453.67 

1  417  602.49 

82  011.90 

1  479  796.28 

98  776.82 

4  308.69 
52  736.24 

2  747.56 

3  293.33 

4  160.65 

4  195.37 

4  315.95 

Public  Library . 

7  534.51 

9  999.63 

15  248.08 

36  004.50 

50  746.02 

195  451.75 

207  581.62 

214  978.42 

205  633.89 

63  583.14 
750 . 00 
170  527.96 
21  999.56 

.L/C/JJdl  LlJLldl  U  CJJL  J-  cxi  . . . . 

Purooii  r\f  PI  Q-tr  err  minds  . 

43  629.56 

15  960.57 

22  773.50 

23  001.33 

24  737.93 

J_)  U.1  Get  U.  vJl  -L  Idj  gi  . . 

A  T otriAri o  1  TAo  ir  "P'.Y-npndpt;  . 

750.00 

743 . 14 

750.00 

750.00 

750 . 00 

lvldllUl  ldl  lvcty  l-/ApenoA/0 . 

89  985.35 

88  760.39 

95  231.00 

111  085.32 

133  275.50 

J_/U]JdI  LlJLldl  L  CJl  v^iiai  a  . . . 

A  P  Poll  of  Prim  mission . 

19  741.52 

21  935.01 

21  073.29 

21  897.54 

23  547.43 

Department  Public  Works  Commissioners 
Offipp  . 

12  053.60 

13  105.12 

12  843.76 

13  166.95 
966  723.32 

13  162.67 

11  990.35 

1  053  280.65 

Bureau  of  Streets  and  Sewers . 

765  597.76 

827  751.45 

930  049.98 

1  035  043.47 

Bureau  of  Accounts  and  Records . 

City  Garage . 

TD  +  c  a ri rl  A/fp^SlirPS . 

5  086.19 

4  993.59 

5  658.76 

319  181.85 
376  984.29 

7  348.49 
4  687.69 
65  124.20 
112  840.89 

290  426.64 
398  651.86 
6  635.25 
4  496.88 
66  269.04 
85  959.12 

pureau  oi  vv eigii to  duu  . . 

205  219.05 

215  941.78 

226  285.62 

226  864.30 
342  112.29 

PUrcaU  OI  VV  atcr  crenel  a± .  .  . . 

*D _ «  -4.  T A 7"-, -for*  TToVif  SprVl  OP  . 

343  604.25 

339  222.26 

361  012.88 

Pureau  oi  water  utut  . . 

T4. -."Ul  7 x-v  A !\ r^onpr^  1  . 

7  418.49 

6  221.16 

6  565.57 

7  274.10 
4  750.91 
61  621.05 
86  794.71 

PUDiic  lviarKer  utucidi.  •  . . 

A/T^^l^-*-  TAoKf  Rprvicp . 

5  061.81 

5  040.00 

5  040.00 

JrUDllC  IViarKei  ueub  ocivico . 

47  860.80 

61  197.08 

64  893.81 

uuty  engineer  b  wuiLe.  •  •  •  . . 

Bureau  of  Municipal  Buildings . 

86  997.81 

71  947.05 

95 . 029 . 82 

Bureau  or  euty  rianning . 

$4  137  298.30 

$4  396.895.41 

$4  743  983.93 

$4  918  586.15 

$5  484  563.19 

$5  643  914.16 

1916 


10  345.61 

720.00 

270.00 

3  500.00 

4  089.11 
36  856.08 
41  667.50 
26  617.97 

341  506.02 


2  246.63 
27  628.84 
1  752.43 
36  685.98 
9  744.25 


27  033.57 
4  671.86 
12  529.35 
20  075.95 

12  644.03 
45  212.40 
100  606.04 
548  436.11 
519  681.19 
15  425.81 
1  335.61 
365.50 
40.00 
622  468.60 

146  932.23 
4  483.97 

57  236.38 

3  381.27 
162  731.72 

71  827.31 
737.66 

147  767.64 
24  698.42 

6  983.04 
117  057.06 
11  436.99 
1  905.32 

6  628.24 
302  286.18 
412  373.40 

7  271.08 

4  480.00 
65  535.87 
90  167.35 


$6  120  077.57 


1917 

1918 

1919 

1920 

1921 

1922 

$  12  520.00 

$  15  419.47 

$  15  580.55 

$  14  839.61 

$  16  028.83 

$  15  244.66 

720  00 

720 . 00 

720.00 

720.00 

720.00 

720.00 

500  00 

500.00 

500.00 

1  595.80 

672.60 

1  035.60 

19  434.00 

5  973.95 

2  830.94 

10  719.14 

20  457.38 

4  494.33 

4  924.08 

6  178.32 

5  905.28 

6  479.17 

7  325 . 02 

35  426.79 

38  323.64 

44  157.78 

53  193.21 

55  702.65 

58  998.69 

28  418.00 

42  485.75 

42  667.00 

45  355.25 

43  197.50 

39  219.50 

28  445.40 

33  405.44 

37  537.30 

40  225.02 

45  766.43 

45  797.22 

326  268.49 

352  145.11 

382  585.21 

553  344.95 

612  071.16 

814  390.84 

1  09/1  SO 

8  236.68 

16  209  58 

21  133.44 

315.00 

1  704.75 

5  329.16 

6  452.63 

8  246.70 

10  875.29 

40  232.83 

33  625.16 

40  633.01 

40  986.13 

52  065.67 

61  843.67 

1  268.35 

1  422.36 

1  586.65 

1  616.60 

1  896.92 

1  923.15 

41  204.26 

47  463.80 

52  233.49 

57  309.58 

62  675.92 

64  059.61 

16  000.00 

19  844.36 

24  770.82 

2  539.62 

20  000.00 

20  000.00 

38  449.06 

50  000.00 

32  919.45 

32  038.43 

37  379.50 

45  192.14 

44  943.68 

47  235.72 

4  759.96 

5  244.78 

6  939.11 

6  672.76 

7  137.63 

7  056.97 

13  016.68 

12  244.49 

15  732.71 

15  091.76 

16  237.84 

16  127.10 

21  713.53 

24  511.60 

28  684.14 

27  053.09 

30  532.86 

31  953.74 

13  112.85 

13  786.00 

16  828.75 

16  971.23 

17  837.17 

17  860.09 

50  870.43 

60  801.21 

77  141.91 

61  508.10 

71  709.49 

85  376.93 

127  763.68 

172.136.44 

176  291.24 

197  573.02 

226  006.28 

268.737.28 

576  195.92 

646  928.89 

828  055.71 

886  417.76 

1  038.207.74 

1  152  442.02 

545  667.64 

625  043.51 

665  348.10 

685  417.84 

875.544.03 

907.206.63 

17  211.29 

17  695.09 

20  529.50 

19  123.98 

23  155.74 

23  659.77 

1  214.19 

1  132.40 

1  354.60 

1  272.35 

1  653.06 

1  930.99 

360 . 00 

360.00 

360 . 00 

388.50 

537.50 

542.50 

60.00 

20.00 

80  00 

1  713  107.77 

2  096  890.43 

2  624  107.86 

3  516  020.44 

4  748  428.01 

5  056  590.21 

165  852.92 

208  389.13 

331  751.16 

355  842.34 

539.264  85 

736.397.05 

5  314.59 

5  988.82 

7  606.64 

7  106.06 

8  313.29 

8  258.15 

72  469.25 

83  274.56 

98  287.31 

95  054.80 

112  754.26 

J153  880.05 

4  938.03 

5  850.23 

11  597.79 

10  332.33 

12  768.03 

14  093.11 

176  892.39 

188  273.26 

240  467.96 

221  609.19 

313  220.19 

335  527.33 

81  635.55 

89  700.00 

105  810.34 

113  006.91 

154  039.47 

146  376.97 

750.00 

748 . 18 

750.00 

733.12 

993.80 

937.45 

149  719.04 

175  651.72 

156  701.79 

147  055.26 

210  272.11 

215  193.51 

27  000.00 

24  700.00 

29  356.84 

26  926.01 

31  936.07 

38  120.76 

7  122.79 

7  289.54 

9  342.26 

9  432.38 

10  344.63 

10  351.55 

1  294  749.08 

1  490  892.09 

1  722  500.00 

1  678  665.02 

1  902  326.75 

2  072  695.60 

18  105.34 

17  159.74 

21  566.05 

20  549.03 

20  856.64 

20  064.95 

2  000.00 

17  627.98 

22  538.45 

19  108.34 

23  640.53 

15  885.77 

8  156.47 

8  623.75 

10  046.86 

10  388.29 

11  813.39 

12  473.38 

363  591.87 

378  580.69 

391  374.22 

464  368.33 

612  509.84 

643  549.23 

447  755.02 

463  756.23 

492  533.60 

495  015.64 

519.527  48 

524  142.96 

7  246.14 

8  404.02 

8  428.36 

9  284.05 

10  287.90 

9  972.53 

4  480.00 

3  605.00 

2  730.00 

2  730.00 

2  730.00 

227.50 

89  216.52 

99  815.21 

126  856.61 

123  658.02 

134  246.99 

144  200.00 

127  459.67 

141  134.56 

148  626.41 

148  294.91 

194.719.33 

177  914.18 

2  618.48 

25  346.02 

23  565.32 

24  018.66 

24  522.62 

$8  728  840.03 

$7  735.068.99 

$9  194  134.11 

, 

$10  285  492.00 

$12  888  777.93 

$14  133  475.23 

•Department  of  Public  Instruction-Debt  service  included  in  General l  Debt  Service  (under  Comptroller)  in  1910,  1911  and  1912. 
flndudes  expenditures  for  Bureau  of  History  amounting  to  $9,399.42. 


TABLE  No.  4 


COMPARISON  OF  1922  BUDGET  EXPENDITURES  WITH  1910 
EXPENDITURES  SHOWING  TOTAL  AND  MOST 
IMPORTANT  ORGANIZATION  ITEMS 


1910 

Expenditures 

1922 

Expenditures 

Percentage 
Increase  1922 
Over  1910 

Total  Budget . 

$4  137  298.30 

$14  133  475.23 

242 

Mayor’s  Office . 

$  10  834.90 

$  15  244.66 

41 

Common  Council  and  City  Clerk. . .  . 

37  994.50 

58  998.69 

55 

Comptroller’s  Office . 

22  715.31 

45  797.22 

102 

Debt  Service— General . 

*166  356.33 

814  390.84 

390 

Department  of  Law . 

22  098.05 

61  843.67 

180 

Treasurer’s  Office . 

30  615.49 

64  059.61 

109 

Department  Assessment  and  Taxa’n  . 

23  410.84 

47  235.72 

102 

City  Court — Criminal  Branch . 

12  524.63 

16  127.10 

29 

City  Court — Civil  Branch . 

Department  of  Public  Safety — Com¬ 
missioner’s  Office . 

12  407.02 

31  953.74 

158 

11  072.95 

17  860.09 

61 

Bureau  of  Health . 

Bureau  of  Fire  (Inc.  Y.  Fire  and 

66  147.74 

268  737.28 

306 

Police  Telegraph) . 

Bureau  of  Police  (Inc.  x/i  Fire  and 

437  245.29 

1  195  130.48 

173 

Police  Telegraph) . 

365  963.62 

949  895.10 

159 

Bureau  of  Buildings . . 

Department  of  Public  Instruction — 

13  633.33 

23  659.77 

74 

General . 

Department  of  Public  Instruction— 

1  041  649.36 

5  056  590.21 

385 

Debt  Service . 

*48  453.67 

736  397.05 

1420 

Library . . 

Department  of  Parks  and  Bureau 

7  534.51 

153  880.05 

1942 

Playgrounds . 

239  081.31 

481  904.30 

102 

Department  of  Charities . 

89  985.35 

215  193.51 

139 

G.  A.  R.  Relief . 

19  741.52 

38  120.76 

93 

Department  of  Public  Works . 

782  737.55 

2  131  471.25 

172 

Bureau  of  Water — General . 

205  219.05 

643  549.23 

214 

Bureau  of  Water — Debt  Service . 

343  604.25 

524  142.96 

53 

Public  Market — General . 

7  418.49 

9  972.53 

34 

City  Engineer’s  Office . 

47  860.80 

144  200.00 

201 

Bureau  of  Municipal  Buildings . 

86  997.81 

177  914.18 

105 

Bureau  of  City  Planning . 

**2  618.48 

24  522.62 

837 

*General  Debt  Service  and  School  Debt  Service  figures  are  for  1913  instead  of  1910, 
because  items  could  not  be  separated  for  1910,  1911  or  1912. 


**1918. 


r 


THE  LIBRARY 


HmVERSITY  OF  ILLINOIS 


TABLE  No.  5 


BUDGET  EXPENDITURES 
(1910  to  1922  Inclusive) 

(Analyzed  by  Object) 


Year 

Debt 

Service 

Personal 

Service 

Other 

Current 

Expense 

Acquisition 
of  Property 

Total 

1910 

$  445  500.66 

$2  348  930.49 

SI  241  616.44 

$  101  250.71 

$4  137  298.30 

1911 

469  264.43 

2  477  884.40 

1  294  960.12 

154  786.46 

4  396  895.41 

1912 

496  056.26 

2  677  783.56 

1  432  574.49 

137  569.62 

4  743  983.93 

1913 

561  673.20 

*2  797  602.88 

1  499  927.75 

59  472.32 

4  918  676.15 

1914 

632  861.10 

3  235  866.07 

1  518  587.37 

97  248.65 

5  484  563.19 

1915 

748  337.63 

3  421  162.48 

1  378  073.90 

96  340.15 

5  643  914.16 

1916 

905  291.65 

3  606  720.45 

1  413  444.51 

f 194  620.96 

6  120  077.57 

1917 

944  356.43 

3  983  215.63 

1  581  627.08 

f219  640.89 

6  728  840.03 

1918 

1  027  895.47 

4  447  057.11 

2  016  192.88 

f243  923.53 

7  735  068.99 

1919 

1  209  599.97 

5  541  895.51 

2  108  764.85 

|333  873.78 

9  194  134.11 

1920 

1  406  932.93 

6  300  619.26 

2  273  533.37 

f304  406.44 

10  285  492.00 

1921 

1  673  593.49 

8  089  915.26 

2  613  467.25 

t511  801.93 

12  879  777.93 

1922 

2  075  158.35 

8  528  975.26 

3  091  426.46 

f437  915.16 

14  133  475.23 

*  Department  of  Public  Instruction  estimated, 
t  Includes  minor  as  well  as  major  equipment. 


TABLE  No.  6 

COMPARISON  OF  1922  BUDGET  EXPENDITURES  WITH  1910 
EXPENDITURES  CLASSIFIED  BY  OBJECT  OF 

EXPENDITURE 


Object  of  Expenditure 

1910  Expenditures 

1922  Expenditures 

Percentage  Increase 
1922  over  1910 

Debt  Service . 

$  445  500.66 

S  2  075  158.35 

366 

Personal  Service . 

2  348  930.49 

8  528  975.26 

263 

Other  Current  Expenses 

1  241  616.44 

3  091  426.46 

149 

Acquisition  of  Property. 

101  250.71 

437  915.16 

333 

Total . 

$4  137  298.30 

$14  133  475.23 

242 

C/3 

oC 

o 

C/3 

C/3 

c n 

C/3 

O 

H 

C* 

H-) 

o 

P4 

H 

CL, 

§ 

o 

u 

I* 

CQ 


00 

6 

£ 

W 

D 

PQ 

< 


O 

« 

HH 

pH 

I— H 

H 

PC 

W 

U 

C/3 

W 

U 

£ 

< 

£ 

M 

o 

PC 

o 

H 

£ 

U3 

S 

> 

o 

PC 

&H 

S 

I-H 


c 

u 

o 

h-3 


(N 

CN 

O' 


4-> 

c 

2 

o 

a 

< 

-4-> 

o 

H 


OhMINiOO 

OONCOiOWO 


CO  00 

t>-  H  !>• 


H05COCO^HCOOOOO 
OHCOGOr^--HCOOO 
CO  00  00  110000  0 


co 

CO 

CM 

CO 

CM 

*0 

05 

CM 

co 

CO 

*0 

CM 

05 

CO 

H 

r-H 

Miscellaneous 

tQ  CD  •  CO  •  CM  00  Is-  -05 

O  CO  •  •  00  CM  CO  •  O 

OH  -CO  •  to  O  H  •  t>- 

OH  •  1— 1  .  to  to  05  -CO 

CM  CO  •  t>  •  05  CM  CO  •  t  - 

to  O  -05  •  CO  i“H  H  • 

O  CO  -CM  •  T-H  t'-  H  •  o 

CM  •  O 

•  •  *  T-H 

<*/>  •  •  • 

$1  402  862.73 

Removal  of 
Poles  and 
Lighting 

05  -OOCMCMNCOOCM 
1>  •  CO  05  tO  H  CO  CO  O 

b-  .(o^conoocoooio 

CO  •0'4cD05i-HCOC005 
H  •  CO  CO  00  05  O  H  CO  GO 

•  cm  h-  ©  i-H  b- 

•  CM  H  H  CO 

m  ■ 

*$151  728.71 

Combina¬ 
tions  (G.  W. 
&S.,  G.&W., 
W.  &  S.,  G.  & 

S.)  Grading 

_ 

$  22  517.84 
33  727.91 
63  621.41 
97  594.34 

8  290.84 
76  491.80 
107  170.42 
48  256.30 
96  870.61 
192  937.46 

$747  478.93 

Openings, 

Extensions, 

Widenings, 

Discon- 

tinuings 

$  16  579.43 

154  247.69 
120  902.51 
84  102.05 
164  440.97 
25  879.54 
38  497.58 
54  694.03 

$659  343.80 

CD»OWH0500510N10 

o 

ONCMhO00O5O^O 

C/3 

CO  CO  05  CO  00  O  05  GO  ’-H  05 

CM 

i  < 

tOi-HHC005CMC50005CM 

00 

OO^OOSIMCOCOON^ 

*o 

> 

iH05COcOCOOOOCOO^ 

b- 

CbJ  r-H  r-H  r-H  r-H  r-H  C4  CO  r-H 

r- 

r-H 

<*=> 

OOO^OCMiO>ONNM 

o 

'^■^r^05050co'ctHtoco 

to 

C/3 

OOOOCMT^THrHCOCOCO 

05 

Lh 

CO’HOO'HIOCJOJN'^^ 

H 

<d 

> 

iCCOCOHOOOO^O^t1  w 

CO 

<v 

CD05CD00NH10COC0O 

*o 

CO 

tONONCO^nOCMOO 

or 

t-H  Tf*  r-H  H  CO  CO 

o 

CM 

m 

m 

OiOiOCMOOiOOCO^Cn 

CO 

C/3 

rt|t010c0I>-O05i0'-HC0 

05 

4H 

c 

C0CM05CMCOc0C005CMCM 

00 

<U 

TJ<IOCON^^OCOHCO 

a 

l^COC5tO©CMOOb-OOH 

05 

h©SC50CM005  00CO 

^H 

O000c0*0*ao005c0-H00 

05 

Co 

o< 

CMCOCDt^-COCOCOCOcOCM 

r-H  r-H 

CO 

«TfiOON00  050H(M 

*"<3 

a 

i-H  r-H  r-H  r-H  r-H  r-H  r-H  04  04  04 

+-> 

CD 

05  05  05  05  05  05  05  05  05  05 

o 

r-H  r-H  r-H  r-H  r-H  r-H  r-H  r-H  r-H  t-H 

*  Lighting — $123,051.54. 
Removal  of  Poles,  $28,677.17. 
fDeepening  Genesee  River. 


Those  Shown.) 

Purpos 

919 

1920 

1921 

1922 

Snow  Remc 
Sidewalk 
Extra  Light 
Sprinkling. 
Care  and  E 
Tree  Plar 
Street  Cleai 
Flushing.  . 
Calcium  CL 

538.28 
163.44 
349.54 

121.10 
962 . 32 

780.29 

$  84  661.02 
35  182.47 
46  128.96 

8  730.67 

$  90  027.74 
38  152.32 
58  248.12 

9  926.77 

$  91  758.73 
38  157.03 
64  680.82 

11  296.73 

nouse  in  urn 

Total. 

514.97 

$174  703.12 

$196  354.95 

$205  893.31 

TABLE  No.  7 


DIRECT  ASSESSMENTS  FOR  CURRENT  EXPENSES 

1911—1922 

(The  Years  Represent  the  Time  of  Collection;  the  Actual  Expenditures  Were  Made  in  the  Years  Previous  to  Those  Shown.) 


Purpose 

1911 

1912 

1913 

1914 

1915 

1916 

1917 

1918 

1919 

1920 

1921 

1922 

Snow  Removal  and 
Sidewalk  Plowing  . . 

$  26  892.49 

t 

$  38  207.96 

$  38  003.02 

$  36  140.96 

$  54  161.28 

$  55  979.57 

$  60  809.81 

$  65  538.28 
37  163.44 

$  84  661.02 
35  182.47 

$  90  027.74 
38  152.32 

CO  O/IO  1  O 

$  91  758.73 
38  157.03 
64  680  82 

Sorinkling . 

44  938.77 

35  597.67 

41  712.98 

40  698.35 

40  747.98 

49  649.54 

46  128.9b 

Oo  Zrfco  . 

Care  and  Emb.  and 
Type  Planting . 

8  091.19 

8  551.21 

5  884.66 

7  034.21 

6  323.92 

6  537.97 
47  225.93 

5  775.29 

5  752.57 

A/I  AQ1  Id. 

7  421.10 
53  962.32 

7  780.29 

8  730.67 

9  926.77 

11  296.73 

Street  Cleaning . 

20  991.41 

27  544.21 

38  915.35 

48  178.15 

55  834.01 

44  247.78 

4  505.55 

O'!  oyi .  JL^fc 

5  489.73 

Calcium  Chloride 

Treatment . 

TToiisp  Numbering.  .  .  . 

5  102.79 
9.84 

4  447.35 

Q  KO/1  KH 

9  003  74 

•  ••••••••••• 

•  ••••••••••• 

162.41 

5  375.54 

•  •••••••••• 

4  144.16 

A  004: .  OU 

L  UUO  .  i  bt 

Total . 

$100  913.86 

$110  063.46 

$91  888.53 

$139  026.36 

$143,494.22 

$147  360.38 

$149  765.03 

$182  012.89 

$221  514.97 

$174  703.12 

$196  354.95 

$205  893.31 

TO  1922  INCLUSIVE,  CL 
ipment) 


1917 

1918 

• 

$  418  828.98 

1  176.55 
257  485.74 
59  393.76 
35  772.86 

$  477  538.96 

775  885.95 
90  000.00 
128  474.97 
14  796.84 

194  583.13 
*22  202.00 
32  998.57 

77  331.54 

992.00 

• 

25  000.00 

30  000.00 

— 

*32  725.00 
163  185.27 

5  320.00 
317  498.05 

$1  133  497.86 

$1  917  838.31 

TABLE:No.  9 


EXPENDITURES  OF  CITY  OF  ROCHESTER  FOR  LAND  AND  BUILDINGS,  1910  TO  1922  INCLUSIVE,  CLASSIFIED  BY  PURPOSE 

(Together  with  totals  expended  for  equipment) 


Cost  Value 

Dec.  31,  1909 

1910 

1911 

1912 

1913 

1914 

1915 

1916 

1917 

1918 

1919 

1920 

1921 

1922 

Cost  Value 
Dec.  31,  1922 

Water . 

$  9  627  513.63 

$395  713.93 

$  382  786.02 

$  359  933.79 

$  242  842.35 

$  510  822.73 

$  236  230.45 

$174  696.35 

$  418  828.98 

$  477  538.96 

$  217  263.56 

$  189  493.82 

$  312  905.93 

$  199  494.61 

$13  746.065.11 

Public  Market . 

192  208  36 

3  224  93 

8  557  00 

1  958  24 

1  176  55 

5  500.00 

212  b25 . 08 

Schools . 

2  521  045.36 

148  038.91 

147  020.10 

191  868.78 

561  394.91 

454  128.95 

434  185.36 

310  149.23 

257  485.74 

775  885.95 

900  270.91 

681  813.43 

1  811  463.55 

2  770  002.85 

11  964.754.03 

Parks  and  Playgrounds . 

1  793  718.82 

100  976.42 

134  643.53 

70  958.00 

238  669.43 

47  079.97 

446  783.71 

*339.17 

59  393.76 

90  000.00 

125  301.83 

197  461.46 

115  186.33 

32  270.86 

3  452  104.95 

Qfii  fin4  on 

9i  09s;  or 

22  741.52 

2  240  67 

52  937.95 

42  615.25 

17  614.98 

i  on 

99  oqp; 

3^  772  86 

128  474  97 

68  321  49 

48  175.34 

1  423  578.78 

Health . 

105  751.13 

ljLj  uuo  .  OU 

14  796.84 

21  263.26 

41  787.47 

29  013.84 

13  958.43 

228  811.64 

Bridges . 

996  137.28 

7  364  00 

92  357  83 

56  528  69 

234  86 

*189  753.69 

535  711.34 

*30  337.38 

16  788.96 

1  485.031.89 

Sewage  Disposal . 

3  109.84 

7  483.11 

286  390.82 

605  894.09 

454  580.43 

320  802.14 

369.679.89 

180  619.80 

194  583.13 

77  331.54 

56  376.98 

49  224.47 

61  784.83 

31  526.71 

2  699  387.78 

Garbage  Disposal . 

125  000.00 

*22  202.00 

225  684.12 

501  559.35 

26  942.92 

856  984 . 39 

Tnpinprat.rvr 

7  141  00 

15  451  61 

62  390  00 

18  338.25 

2  722.30 

32  998.57 

992 . 00 

140  033.73 

P.nnvp nt inn  TT g  1 1 

83  720  00 

28  382.05 

1  043  50 

78  000  00 

191  145.55 

Exnnsit.ion  Park 

24  481.96 

220  842.60 

262  357.56 

1  742  73 

25  000.00 

54  551.94 

*100  000.00 

488  976.79 

Gi  tv  Ga  r a  pp 

31  855.56 

6  500  00 

30  000.00 

15  000.00 

83  355.56 

380  953  83 

380  953.83 

Miscellaneous  Properties . 

198  055.47 

*7  511.21 

27  617.55 

6  373.65 

200 . 00 

*35  523.65 

*119  174.38 

96  200.00 

*32  725.00 

5  320.00 

*9  040.00 

*13  350.00 

174  342.71 

25  318.13 

316  103.27 

**Equipment — all  departments 

785  209.17 

25  955.22 

36  395.70 

155  079.86 

46  250.03 

96  155.02 

92  972.13 

125  484.51 

163  185.27 

317  498.05 

200  109.31 

313  884.67 

412  491.36 

93.18 

2  770.763.48 

Total . 

$17  680  649.85 

$743  779.10 

$1  416  469.84 

$1  780  270.62 

$1  626  332.78 

$1  497  637,14 

$1  470  435.40 

$844  152.39 

$1  133  497.86 

$1  917  838.31 

$1  649  419.28 

$2  269  886.12 

$3  288  410.52 

$3  121  896.65 

$40  440  675.86 

*Deduction 

**Figures  for  Equipment  show  differences  between  inventories  at  beginning  and  end  of  years. 


TABLE  No.  10 

REVENUES  OF  CITY  OF  ROCHESTER 

(All  Revenues  Which  Are  Applicable  To  Current  Funds,  Except 

Proceeds  of  Borrowing) 


Year 

Tax  Levy 

Utility 

Revenues 

Miscellaneous 

Revenues 

Total 

1910 

$  3  190  740.50 

$  605  468.53 

$  495  458.33 

$  4  291  667.36 

1911 

3  323  884.50 

631  292.78 

526  245.78 

4  481  423.06 

1912 

3  679  260.00 

659  549.99 

544  132.93 

4  882  942.92 

1913 

3  863  757.67 

703  281.98 

543  716.56 

5  110  756.21 

1914 

4  250  490.35 

718  345.27 

580  833.73 

5  549  669.35 

1915 

4  457  946.16 

704  716.22 

596  741.87 

5  759  404.25 

1916 

4  999  673.86 

765  322.61 

619  813.26 

6  384  809.73 

1917 

5  221  047.39 

838  765.31 

811  827.86 

6  871  640.56 

1918 

5  934  977.15 

877  178.20 

1  114  009.60 

7  926  164.95 

1919 

6  886  165.45 

910  611.82 

1  270  531.50 

9  067  308.77 

1920 

6  907  678.08 

986  031.60 

2  021  369.63 

9  915  079.31 

1921 

8  060  395.91 

1  172  926.39 

2  680  227.74 

11  913  550.04 

1922 

10  599  083.19 

1  245  071.55 

2  860  634.22 

14  704  788.96 

TABLE  No.  11 

ASSESSED  VALUATIONS  OF  PROPERTY 

(1905  to  1922) 


Year 

Real 

Franchise 

Pension 

Personal 

Total 

1905 

$114  244  975 

$  5  742  825 

$353  450 

$6  598  600 

$126  939  850 

1906 

119  514  240 

8  298  675 

372  000 

6  918  000 

135  102  915 

1907 

126  103  720 

10  168  000 

398  650 

7  460  400 

144  130  770 

1908 

130  395  645 

11  781  225 

405  115 

7  180  250 

149  762  235 

1909 

134  906  345 

12  072  800 

411  325 

7  056  550 

154  447  020 

1910 

143  621  435 

13  059  600 

424  950 

8  305  500 

165  411  485 

1911 

152  588  132 

14  427  500 

436  400 

8  048  900 

175  500  932 

1912 

165  956  275 

14  281  300 

449  775 

8  122  300 

188  809  650 

1913 

175  668  235 

15  752  030 

462  500 

8  132  800 

200  015  565 

1914 

191  209  695 

15  632  520 

451  125 

8  190  700 

215  484  040 

1915 

202  737  920 

14  623  120 

479  400 

8  359  600 

226  200  040 

1916 

215  285  489 

16  411  120 

513  800 

9  731  550 

241  941  959 

1917 

246  377  599 

18  824  681 

539  860 

11  030  200 

276  772  340 

1918 

251  968  654 

19  146  025 

526  000 

2  643  450 

274  284  129 

1919 

264  912  574 

18  199  991 

537  825 

2  804  950 

286  455  340 

1920 

275  872  171 

20  139  120 

497  600 

1  025  250 

297  534  141 

1921 

331  964  144 

19  391  040 

494  450 

681  650 

352  531  284 

1922 

339  451  203 

19  293  520 

485  525 

554  200 

359  784  448 

TABLE  No.  12 


ASSESSED  VALUATION,  EQUALIZATION  RATE  AND 
ESTIMATED  TRUE  VALUATION  OF  PROPERTY 

(1913  to  1922) 


Year 

Total  Assessed 
Valuation 

Equalization 

Rate 

Estimated 

Full  Valuation 

1913 

$200  015  565 

80% 

$250  019  456 

1914 

215  484  040 

75% 

287  312  053 

1915 

226  200  040 

80% 

282  750  050 

1916 

241  941  959 

80% 

302  427  448 

1917 

276  772  340 

83% 

333  460  650 

1918 

274  289  129 

83% 

330  468  830 

1919 

286  455  340 

83% 

345  126  915 

1920 

297  534  141 

83% 

358  474  868 

1921 

352  531  284 

88% 

400  603  731 

1922 

359  784  448 

88% 

408  845  963 

TABLE  No.  13 

TAX  RATE  APPLICABLE  TO  GENERAL  MUNICIPAL 

EXPENSE 

(1910  to  1922) 

(Reference  to  2%  Constitutional  Tax  Limit) 


Year 

Total 

Assessed 

Valuation 

Total 

Tax 

Levy 

Portion  of 
Levy  Cover- 
.  ing  General 
Debt  Service 

Portion  of 
Levy  cover¬ 
ing  General 
Mun.  Expense 

Ratio  of 

G.  M.  E.  Levy 
to  Assessment 
of  Previous  yr. 

1909 

1910 

$154  447  020 
165  411  485 

$3  190  740.50 

$  96  834.60 

$3  093  905.90 

.0200 

1911 

175  489  632 

3  323  884.50 

125  002.17 

3  198  882.33 

.0192 

1912 

188  809  650 

3  679  260.00 

130  003.38 

3  549  256.62 

.0202 

1913 

200  015  565 

3  863  757.67 

214  900.00 

3  648  857.67 

.0193 

1914 

215  484  040 

4  250  490.35 

251  189.12 

3  999  301.23 

.0200 

1915 

226  200  040 

4  457  946.16 

345  188.89 

4  112  757.27 

.0191 

1916 

241  941  959 

4  999  673  86 

488  438.25 

4  511  235.61 

.0199 

1917 

276  772  340 

5  221  047.39 

492  121.41 

4  728  925.98 

.0195 

1918 

274  289  129 

5  934  977.15 

560  534.24 

5  374  442.91 

.0195 

1919 

286  455  340 

6  886  165.45 

714  336.37 

6  171  829.08 

.0225 

1920 

297  546  391 

6  907  679.49 

1  197  439.49 

5  710  240.00 

.0199 

1921 

352  531  284 

8  060  395  91 

2  116  552.61 

5  943  843.30 

.0199 

1922 

359  784  448 

10  599  083.19 

3  563  964.11 

7  035  119.08 

.0199 

MUNIC] 

'ension  Fund} 


1916  I 


8  415.00 
3  042.00 
170.30 
247.25 
506 . 00 


285 . 00 


30  210.30 
204  216.38 


1  9QR  7A 


THE  LIBRARY 
OF  THE 

UNIVERSITY  OF  ILLINOIS 


n 


TABLE  No.  14 

REVENUES  OF  THE  CITY  OF  ROCHESTER  FROM  SOURCES  OTHER  THAN  MUNICIPAL  TAXATION  AND  BORROWING 

1910  to  1922 


(Not  including  Receipts  Applicable  to  Police  and  Fire  Pension  Fund) 


Department  of 
Collection 


City  Clerk. 


Comptroller . 


Assessment  and 
Taxation . 


Treasurer. 


C.  C.  Criminal . 

C.  C.  Civil - 

Health  Bureau. 


Fire  Bureau . 

Dept.  Public  Instruc. 

Library . 

Dept,  of  Parks . 

Dept,  of  Charities.  .  . 

.  Water  Bureau . 

Street  and  Sewer 
Bureau . 


Kind  of  Revenue 


Dog  Licenses . 

Marriage  Licenses.  . 

Hunters’  Fees . 

Commr.  Deed  Fees. 

Sign  Licenses . 

Areaways . 

Miscellaneous . 

Midwives . 


Int.  Bank  Balance . 

Liquor  Licenses . 

Share  State  Income  Tax  (lA)- 
Share  State  Corp.  Tax  (y$)  ■  ■ 
Premium  on  Notes . 


Misc.  Revenues. 


Int.  on  Taxes . 

Bank  Taxes . 

Tax  Redemptions . 

Licensed  Auctioneers . 

Licensed  Bill  Posters . 

Licensed  Cartmen . 

Licensed  Emp.  Agencies . 

Licensed  Hucksters . 

Licensed  Peddlers . 

Licensed  Movie  Operator. .  . . 
Licensed  Secondhand  Stores. 
Licensed  Public  Vehicles.  .  .  . 

Licensed  Drivers . 

Licensed  Motorcycles . 

Fees,  Plumbers . 

Fees,  Sta.  Engineers . 

Fees,  Searches . 

Fees,  Miscellaneous . 

Real  Estate  Dealers . 


Fines . 
Fees. . 


Licenses,  Milk  Dealers. 
Licenses,  Ice  Dealers. . . 
Licenses,  Scavengers . .  . 
Licenses,  Miscellaneous . 


Market  Bureau.  .  .  . 
Div.  Muni.  Buildings  . 


Corporation  Counsel. 

Police  Bureau . 

Police  and  Fire  Tele. 
Bureau  of  Buildings. 

D.  P.  W.  General - 

Genesee  Valley  Park. 
♦Undistributed . 


Miscellaneous. . 
Miscellaneous. . 
Miscellaneous. . 
Miscellaneous. . 
Miscellaneous. , 
M  iscellaneous 


Incinerator.  .  .  ._ . 

Sidewalk  Cleaning . 

Sidewalk  Repairing . 

Garbage  Reduction  Plant... 

Snow  Removal . 

Miscellaneous . 


Miscellaneous. 


Convention  Hall . 

Exposition  Park . 

City  Hall  Maintenance. 

Sale  of  Buildings . 

Sale  of  Lots,  etc . 


Total  Misc.  Revenues 
(exc.  those  applicable 
to  Pens  ion  Funds) 


Miscellaneous . 

Miscellaneous . 

Miscellaneous . 

Miscellaneous . 

Miscellaneous . 

Damage  Award  N.  Y.  State. 


1910 


7  985.00 
2  345.00 
132.80 
157.00 
515.00 


24  778.25 
202  586.07 


23  189.06 

58  066.46 
* 

400.00 
280 . 00 
105.00 
175.00 


755 . 00 


130.00 
464 . 00 
3  147.25 


4  378.00 

5  815.65 

1  018.86 
41.00 
34.00 

* 


121  380.32 


1  772.23 
592  725.44 


13  418.34 


12  743.09 


1911 


8  018.00 
2  569.00 
139.00 
162.25 

* 


24  655.10 
202  630.09 


23  145.62 

59  664.44 
* 

350.00 

340.00 

193.00 

300.00 


1  100.00 

"iie'.oo 


140 . 00 
769.00 

3  019.70 
* 


2  233.00 

7  584.55 

1  100.00 
104 . 00 
33.00 

♦ 


147  963.79 


1  075.50 
617  955.24 


4  078.17 


13  337.54 


1912 


8  470.00 
2  702.00 
131.70 
223 . 00 


21  799.97 
204  648.74 


24  109.83 

61  235.20 
* 

450 . 00 
280 . 00 
68.00 
275.00 


1  370.00 
"194:00' 


140.00 
673 . 00 

3  410.00 
* 


3  698.00 

7  755.80 

1  155.00 
140.00 
22.00 

* 


143  125.90 


1  357.00 
639  935.76 


21  261.97 


19  614.23 


1913 


8  533.00 
2  929.65 
152.80 
146.25 


22  588.06 
204  315.23 


30  231.17 

61  676.66 
* 

450 . 00 
240 . 00 
112.00 
200 . 00 


1  055.00 


206 . 00 
86.00 


145 . 00 
937 . 00 
3  073.75 


206 . 89 


22  182.15 


Utility  Revenues . 

Other  Miscellaneous  Revenues 


$1  100  926.86 
605  468.53 


495  458.33 


34  762.57 


$1  157  538.56 
631  292.78 


526  245.78 


35  436.82 


$1  203  682.92 
659  549.99 


544  132.93 


3  755.00 

8  350.00 

1  184.00 
88.00 
22.00 


146  244.38 


711.06 
679  327.21 


23  094.47 


23  954.77 


1914 


8  829.00 
2  959.70 
148.10 

255.25 

* 


22  981.09 
206  683.38 


31  107.75 

66  569.67 
* 

350.00 
200 . 00 
123.00 
175.00 


1  440.00 
154.00 
202 . 00 
65.00 


2  325.00 
175.00 
1  012.00 
2  810.75 


23  010.08 


$1  246  998.54 
703  281.98 


543  716.56 


4  290.05 

10  395.95 

1  115.00 
84.00 
22.00 


156-897.26 


497 . 02 
692  926.73 


32  618.98 


25  418.54 


1915 


027 . 00 
701.80 
159.00 
170.25 
777.00 


23  112.11 

197  582.91 


1  256.04 

38  515.06 
66  757.19 
687 . 00 
450 . 00 
180.00 
83.00 
175.00 
105.00 
140 . 00 
157.00 
222 . 00 
900 . 00 
242 . 50 
225 . 00 
185.00 
223 . 00 
737 . 75 
127.35 


1 


1 

2 


26  347.78 


4  984.00 

11  136.80 

1  238.00 
133.00 
11.00 
503.73 

1  556.57 
169  268.54 

2  709.39 
18  255.78 

1  826.85 
678  802.72 


17  164.35 

1  418.01 
3  717.90 


8  834.70 

25  913.50 

3  741.50 
697.92 
15.92 


603.69 


26.62 


1916 


8  415.00 
3  042.00 
170.30 
247.25 
506 . 00 


285 . 00 


30  210.30 
204  216.38 


1  296.76 

41  298.81 
70  258.56 
845 . 00 
350 . 00 
140.00 
79.00 
175.00 
75.00 
810.00 
150.00 
236 . 00 
206 . 00 
47.00 


860.00 
1  430.00 
3  146.25 
241.15 


4  541.00 
11  252.55 

1  303.00 
142.00 

11.00 

408.25 

2  672.08 
162  445.86 

2  297.67 
13  820.18 
1  734.50 
740  638.37 


20  078.67 
2  016.92 
2  950.88 


8  435.64 

9  141.12 

24  684.24 

4  835.65 
1  616.14 
10.00 


1  243.02 


60.37 


$1  299  179.90 
718  345.27 


580  833.73 


II  301  458.09 
704  716.22 


596  741.87 


385  075.87 
765  322.61 


619  753.26 


1917 


268 . 00 
041.70 
133.50 
170.00 
529 . 00 


165 . 00 


32  583.34 
290  041.84 


1  324.35 

45  209.99 
76  821.57 
830 . 00 
400 . 00 
160.00 
65.00 
175 . 00 
60.00 
605 . 00 
132.00 
240 . 00 
95.00 


130.00 

1  445.00 

2  477.35 

15.30 


4  222.00 

10  737.27 

1  264.00 
157.00 
11.00 
549 . 90 

1  205.71 
242  194.69 

2  582.63 
14  964.49 

1  551.30 
813  146.57 


17  956.41 

2  141.66 

3  716.96 
26  758.76 

276.52 
10  278.65 

25  -618.74 

4  425.00 
1  071.80 

4.50 


1  345.15 


279.76 


15.76 


650  593.17 
838  765.31 


I  811  827.86 


1918 

1919 

1920 

1921 

1922 

$  480 . 00 

$  7  729.12 

|  3  544.09 

$  10  474.42 

I  16  314.25 

2  390.60 

3  174.50 

3  447.45 

3  039.40 

3  106.15 

50.70 

81.40 

234.65 

283 . 75 

331.75 

202 . 00 

196.75 

186 . 00 

228.00 

245 . 25 

463 . 00 

441 . 00 

995 . 00 

1  453.00 

1  561 . 00 

80.00 

75.00 

180.00 

150.00 

140.00 

230 . 00 

86.38 

1  158.43 

20.00 

10.00 

34  291  16 

39  797.68 

49  416.09 

37  694.15 

73  290.14 

385  541.36 

178  155.19 

2  890.37 

870.60 

2  316.00 

403  160.56 

352  589.55 

335  605 . 13 

227  253.45 

567  043.83 

579  097.86 

566  317.90 

69  952.94 

1  331.16 

1  548.17 

1  546.65 

1  657.29 

1  659.29 

60  302.55 

74  375.91 

68  507.08 

72  713.33 

96  308.56 

78  648.48 

82  848.83 

86  090.69 

90  450.21 

79  547.60 

849 . 50 

1  111.00 

1  404.00 

1  176.00 

1  403.00 

550.00 

700.00 

800 . 00 

700.00 

700.00 

120.00 

200 . 00 

200.00 

220 . 00 

360.00 

77.00 

91.00 

106.00 

200 . 00 

117.00 

200.00 

125 . 00 

125.00 

150.00 

175.00 

15  00 

559 . 00 

710.00 

643 . 00 

1  391.00 

1  099.00 

101.00 

188.00 

257 . 00 

124.25 

178.85 

256 . 00 

292 . 00 

244 . 00 

238 . 00 

228 . 00 

660.00 

320.00 

45.00 

210.00 

240 . 00 

317.00 

249 . 00 

1  462.00 

1  758.00 

1  567.00 

1  585.00 

1  648.00 

1  776.50 

5  981.00 

8  999.75 

7  956.50 

8  820.50 

2.59 

314.61 

5  086.00 

2  380.00 

5  891.00 

3  702.00 

5  057.00 

5  826.00 

9  045.90 

9  089.00 

9  240.10 

11  916.60 

13  877.63 

1  241.00 

1  476.00 

1  087.00 

636.00 

958 . 00 

90.00 

100.00 

41.00 

53.00 

53.00 

10  00 

877 : 08 

1  237.57 

288.59 

150 . 26 

2  085.64 

4  193.86 

1  660.32 

2  489.15 

2  459.48 

213  059.15 

247  332.04 

677  821.65 

1  266  815.68 

1  316  581.13 

4  351.35 

4  287.31 

6  745.46 

10  666.70 

6  529.68 

9  134.45 

9  780.18 

17  400.89 

37  271.34 

40  279.17 

1  841.56 

2  245.33 

2  472.25 

3  052.85 

2  936.36 

852  361.59 

884  053.32 

959  423.78 

1  142  833.38 

1  212  172.89 

20  076.29 

19  089.86 

21' 217.69 

12  820.37 

11  654.97 

1  146.67 

421.24 

91.65 

755.30 

3  129.21 

3  640.87 

3  834.29 

1  144.75 

3  617.09 

27  723.73 

34  172.95 

28  445 . 12 

12  955.90 

83  901.13 

49.90 

14  207.86 

9  828.04 

17  739.79 

16  251.30 

20  022.63 

24  816.61 

26  558.50 

26  607.82 

30  093.01 

32  898.66 

2  635.00 

7  270.40 

11  731.27 

10  875.00 

10  645.51 

1  047.85 

1  055.32 

2  285.00 

2  275.00 

3  220.00 

3.00 

300 . 00 

225 . 00 

300 . 00 

300 . 00 

47  560.00 

6  650.00 

70^  92 

1  793.98 

1  852.65 

2  015.63 

1  857.70 

2  225.79 

852 . 37 

914.95 

1  853.12 

1  045.97 

1  757.55 

171.68 

317.12 

673.79 

1  143.23 

1  289.28 

2  381.78 

43.35 

241.42 

67.93 

7.88 

36.00 

73.0S 

100  000.00 

1  679.87 

5  299.69 

9  171.23 

11  991  187.80 

$2  181  142.82 

13  007  401.23 

13  842  570.33 

14  052  112.15 

877  178.20 

910  611.82 

986  031.60 

1  172  926.39 

1  245  507.55 

|1  114  009.60 

$1  270  531.00 

12  021  369.63 

$2  669  643.94 

12  806  604.60 

TABLE  No.  15 


COST  OF  LOCAL  IMPROVEMENTS  CERTIFIED  IN  YEARS 

(1913  to  1922)  AND  ANALYSIS  OF 
ASSESSMENT  CHARGES 


Year 

Charges 
Against 
City 
at  Large 

Charges 

Against 

City 

Parcels 

Total 
Against 
City  of 
Rochester 

Total 
Against 
N.  Y.  S. 
Railways 

Total 

Against 

All  other 
Property 

Total 

Locals 

Certified 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

1913 

250  043.42 

29  376.52 

279  419.94 

171  085.13 

1  154  386.90 

1  604  891.97 

1914 

15  896.08 

18  144.71 

34  040.79 

815  677.76 

849  718.55 

1915 

3  500.00 

43  838.08 

47  338.08 

71  402.84 

744  594.31 

863  335.23 

1916 

59  290.95 

43  807.99 

103  098.94 

*54  994.75 

1  025  428.69 

1  183  522.38 

1917 

35  525.29 

61  575.98 

97  101.27 

474  252.59 

571  353.86 

1918 

3  819.20 

55  112.21 

58  931.41 

957  073.68 

1  016  005.09 

1919 

64  793.71 

22  507.85 

87  301.56 

781  476.82 

868  778.38 

1920 

82  650.16 

6  131.59 

88  781.75 

499  648.89 

613  827.75 

1921 

150  233.24 

85  695.47 

235  928.71 

9  180.52 

930  677.74 

1  175  786.97 

1922 

1  055  671.88 

94  326.55 

1  149  998.43 

213  593.57 

1  870  880.26 

3  234  471.96 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

Total 

1  721  423.93 

460  516.95 

2  181  940.88 

520  256.81 

9  254  097.64 

11  956  295.33 

*Includes  $27  231.99  against  New  York  Central. 


TABLE  No.  16 


CHARGES  AGAINST  THE  CITY  OF  ROCHESTER  ON  ACCOUNT 
OF  LOCAL  IMPROVEMENT  ASSESSMENTS,  E.  S.  T.  S. 
ASSESSMENTS,  AND  ADDITIONS  TO  ANNUAL 

TAX  ROLLS 


Year 

City’s  Share  of 
Locals 

City’s  Share  of 
E.  S.  T.  S. 

City’s  Share  of 
Addition  to  Tax  Roll 

Total 

1913 

$  279  419.94 

$  2  502.54 

$  281  922.48 

1914 

34  040.79 

$13  360.99 

3  604.83 

51  006.61 

1915 

47  338.08 

2  811.87 

50  149.95 

1916 

103  098.94 

3  753.24 

106  852.18 

1917 

97  101.27 

4  367.77 

101  469.04 

1918 

58  931.41 

5  873.60 

64  805.01 

1919 

87  301.56 

12  935.75 

7  733.83 

107  971.14 

1920 

88  781 . 75 

6  737.93 

95  519.68 

1921 

235  928.71 

7  297.05 

243  225.76 

1922 

1  149  998.43 

7  385.35 

1  157  383.78 

Total  . 

$2  181  940.88 

$26  296.74 

$52  068.01 

$2  260  305.63 

TABLE  No.  17 

SUMMARY  OF  MONEY  RAISED  BY  BORROWING 

(1910  to  1922  Inclusive) 

(Excluding  Refunding  Transactions) 


Funds  Carrying  Debt 

Purpose  of  Debt 

Amount 

Assessment  Funds.  .  .  . 

Local  Improvement  Construction . 

$  6  941  000.00 

Water  Fund . 

Water  Improvement  and  Conduit  Construc¬ 
tion . 

4  280  000.00 

Market  Fund . 

Public  Market  Construction . 

10  000.00 

General  Fund . 

In  anticipation  of  Taxes . 

25  402  500.00 

To  cover  delinquent  Taxes . 

1  069  724.78 

To  cover  budget  deficiencies  and  emergencies 

5  872  000.00 

General  outlays* . 

19  166  420.97 

Total . 

$62  741  645.75 

*Of  the  amount  borrowed  for  general  outlays  ($19,166,420.97),  the  sum  of 
$430,820.97  was  liquidated  after  short  terms  out  of  current  revenues;  the  remainder  (or 
$18,735,600.)  has  either  been  funded  into  long  term  bonds  or  is  outstanding  as  note 
indebtedness,  waiting  to  be  funded. 


(84) 


TABLE  No.  18 

MONEY  RAISED  BY  BORROWING  (1910  to  1922)  CLASSIFIED  BY  YEARS  AND  FUNDS 


d 

4-> 

o 


0001^.0000000000 

OL'-OOOOOOOOOOO 

ddOOCOOOOOOOOO 

NNOOCOOOOOOOOO 

OCWCINCOIOIOOOOOOO 

ClfOcOfOCO'^NCOiOOONH 

ClON'fCSrtffi^OOHcooooo 

OOCOIOCOOOIOCOIOHNMOI 

<HCOCOC9COCOMCOCOiOCOOf9 

m 


d! 

d 

d 

pH 

”d 

u 

<D 


o 


t- 

tc 

d 

co 


d 

L- 

CN 

o 


C/3 

OOOOOOOOOOOOO 

OOOOOOOOOOOOO 

05 

■  OOOOCOOOOOOOOO 

o 

o 

CMOCOOCOOOOOOOOri 

CM 

COh^ncoioioOOOOOO 

d 

cj 

id 

^OIWCIOIOCIOOIOOOIOH 

CO 

CD 

lOfOGOiONdWiONCOCOrHOi 

CO 

c 

HONOdOOOOO^WOOOO 

H 

cu 

o 

d 1  d  H  T— l  CN  CN  to 

05 

m 

C/3 

(1) 

•  -O  •  -o  -oooooo 

o 

«  o'o 

•  -o  •  -o  -oooooo 

o 

a  -go  g 

•  -o  •  -o  -oooooo 

o 

trl  h/l 

-  -o  -  -o  -oooooo 

o 

-  -o  •  -o  -oooooo 

o 

Cd  d  CJ  CD 

•  •  O  •  -00  •OOOICNO 

<M 

o  ^  G 

•  •  •  •  1— l  •  O  IO  IO  CD  d  ^ 

o 

H  d  " 

. <M  CM  O  CO  O 

00 

o 

■  •  •  •  •  r- 1  <M  1-1 

to 

m 

a 

•  00  •  •  o  •  •  -ooo  •  o 

00 

•  o  •  •  o  •  •  -ooo  - o 

o 

^  2 

•  d  •  ^  o  i  i  -ooo  -o 

d 

^  Cu 

•  CM  -  -  O  -  •  -OOO  -o 

CM 

•  O  •  •  O  •  •  -OOO  -  o 

o 

V  +J 

.  .  .  .  . 

£  C 

•CO  •  -00  •  •  -OtQO  -  o 

05 

R 

-T— i  -  -CM  •  •  ■  O  IN  O  -  O 

CD 

O  jj 

. -C9 

o 

o  cr 

.  .  .  .  .  . 

:  :  :  :  :  :  : 

r-H 

m 

a 

ooooooooooooo 

o 

_o 

ooooooooooooo 

o 

4^> 

ooooooooooooo 

o 

o  </3 

ooooooooooooo 

o 

.2^  <D 

OOOtQOOOOOOOOO 

to 

o  X 

■  d  d 

OCOIQIOOCDMIOIOOOOO 

CM 

d  ^ 

lOOHCDNHNiOiOiOOOO 

o 

Cj 

HC9d^^iCNOOdiDOOOW 

d 

d 

H  t-H  r— 1  r-H  t— 1  i-H  T— H  r— 1  r— 1  C\J  CO  CO 

to 

hH 

CM 

m 

m 

o 

4-> 

o 

-  -  -  o . 

o 

Id  S 

•  •  •  o . 

o 

d  ^ 

•  •  •  o . 

o 

-  -  -  o . 

o 

H 

■  m . 

o 

•  »— I 

3 

d 

cv 


ooooooooooooo 

o 

^0 

£ 

ooooooooooooo 

o 

d 

ooooooooooooo 

o 

pLn 

ooooooooooooo 

o 

ooooooooooooo 

o 

CD 

lOtOOOOLOOtOOLOOlOO 

o 

M  N  ‘O  O  C  CO  IO  N  O  CO  1C  N  CO 

00 

deOCO(MtO<MCDCOd<Md!M>— i 

CM 

P* 

d 

m 

ooooooooooooo 

o 

4-> 

ooooooooooooo 

o 

ooooooooooooo 

o 

ooooooooooooo 

o 

C/3  C 

OOtotOOOOOOOOOO 

o 

C/3  rd 

03  rT 

OOHOOiOCiOCiOCOOOO 

r-H 

c/3  Mh 

OcONONOOOcOOMhOCJ 

d 

C/3 

<f 

HNiowd^dccoHcow^Hd* 

05 

r-H  t-H 

CO 

c© 

m 

OwNCCd'iCCONOOOCHN 

*d 

d 

t— H  1— H  r— 1  i— H  r-H  r— 1  H  r-H  r-H  t-d  ^\J 

<D 

O-  Cj  C  J  03  03  03  03  03  03  Cj  03  03  03 

o 

>* 

r-H  t-H  r— H  i— H  »-H  H  r-H  r-H  r-H  r- H  r-H  r-H  r-H 

d 

/ 


TABLE  No.  19 


SUMMARY  STATEMENT  OF  NOTE  TRANSACTIONS 

BY  YEARS 

(1910  to  1922  Inclusive) 

(Excluding  Note  Renewals) 


Year 

New  Notes  Issued 

Notes  Paid  from 
Current  Revenues 

Notes  Funded 

1910 

$  1  829  827.00 

$  1  224  827.00 

1911 

3  393  824.78 

1  215  600.00 

1912 

3  052  360.97 

1  441  349.78 

$  1  000  000.00 

1913 

2  843  700.00 

1  536  810.22 

5  659  000.00 

1914 

2  976  333.00 

1  645  875.00 

900  000.00 

1915 

3  034  500.00 

1  557  550.75 

2  000  000.00 

1916 

3  597  500.00 

1  779  033.00 

1  270  000.00 

1917 

3  648  000.00 

1  890  000.00 

1  875  000.00 

1918 

3  585  000.00 

2  112  000.00 

2  268  000.00 

1919 

5  116  000.00 

2  630  000.00 

1  715  000.00 

1920 

6  760  000.00 

3  340  000.00 

1921 

8  507  000.00 

4  711  000.00 

3  575  000.00 

1922 

9  030  000.00 

5  777  000.00 

2  940  000.00 

Total.  . 

$57  374  045.75 

$30  861  045.75 

$23  202  000.00 

TABLE  No.  20 


SUMMARY  STATEMENT  BY  PURPOSE  OF  NOTE 

TRANSACTIONS 

(1910  to  1922  Inclusive) 

(Excluding  Note  Renewals) 


Purpose  of  Note  Issue 


Revenues . 

Overdue  Tax . 

Local  Improvement . 

E.  S.  T .  S . 

Deepening  Genesee  River — Sec.  1 . 
Deepening  Genesee  River — Sec.  2. 


Overflow  Sewer 
Water  Improvement. . 
Conduit  Construction. 
Market  Construction. 

Sewage  Disposal . 

Garbage  Disposal.  .  .  . 

Incinerator . 

Convention  Hall . 

Exposition  Park . 

City  Garage . 


Fire  House  Construction . 

City  Hall  Annex . . 

Voting  Machine  Purchase . 

Municipal  Building  Construction. 

Brown  Street  Subway . 

36  School  Playground . 

Front  Street  Playground . 


Construction . 

Durand  Eastman  Park  Pier  Con 

struction . 

Land  Purchase — Pike’s  Quarry - 

Land  Purchase — Armory  Park.  . .  . 
Land  Purchase — Genesee  Valle} 

Park . 


Land  Purchase — 18th  Ward  Park 
Land  Purchase — Pinnacle  Park.  .  . 
Land  Purchase — Seneca  Park. . 


Land  Purchase — West  High.  .  . 
Land  Purchase — Britton  Field. 
Land  Purchase — Summerville 

Docks . 

Land  Purchase — Court  Street. 


Land  Purchase — Tryon  Park. 
Park  Improvement . 


Pinnacle  Avenue  Pipe  Line 
School — Building  and  Site. . 


Charities  Deficiency . 

Election  Deficiency . 

War  Emergency . 

Repairs  Under  Guarantee.  . 
Street  Cleaning  Equipment. 
School  C.  E.  Deficiency.  . .  . 


Western  Sewage . 

General  Deficiency 
Lewiston  Avenue  Bridge. 


Total. 


Notes. 


cipation  Notes) 


Notes  Paid 

New  Notes 

From  Current 

Notes 

Issued 

Revenues 

Funded 

$25  402  500.00 

$25  402  500.00 

1  069  724.78 

864  724.78 

5  941  500.00 

41  500.00 

$5  450  000.00 

128  500.00 

128  500.00 

100  000.00 

100  000.00 

475  000.00 

475  000.00 

46  000.00 

46  000.00 

2  510  000.00 

4  049  000.00 

1  545  000.00 

1  545  000.00 

10  000.00 

10  000.00 

2  875  000.00 

105  000.00 

2  755  000.00 

875  000.00 

875  000.00 

140  000.00 

140  000.00 

20  000.00 

20  000.00 

501  992.97 

31  992.97 

470  000.00 

30  000.00 

30  000.00 

30  000.00 

30  000.00 

75  000.00 

75  000.00 

10  000.00 

10  000.00 

79  156.00 

9  156.00 

70  000.00 

570  000.00 

550  000.00 

325  000.00 

95  000.00 

6  500.00 

6  500  00 

30  000  00 

30  000.00 

L 

7  000.00 

7  000.00 

10  000.00 

10  000.00 

5  000.00 

5  000.00 

5  000.00 

5  000.00 

r 

123  500.00 

123  500.00 

28  000.00 

28  000.00 

6  900.00 

6  900.00 

18  527.00 

18  527.00 

35  712.00 

4  212.00 

31  500.00 

35  000.00 

5  000.00 

30  000.00 

13  200.00 

8  200.00 

5  000.00 

12  333  00 

12  333.00 

50  456  80 

50  456.80 

74  543.20 

74  543.20 

15  000  00 

-  7  000  00 

3  000  00 

9  000  00 

9  000  00 

4  500.00 

4  500.00 

57  500  00 

57  500.00 

7  525  000  00 

6  100  000.00 

350  000.00 

350  000.00 

18  000  00 

18  000  00 

7  000  00 

7  000  00 

i  000  00 

150  000  00 

i o  non  no 

10  000.00 

100  000  00 

100  000.00 

o  07n  non  no 

2  445  000.00 

o  u  #  u  uuu  .  uu 
Q00  000  00 

940  000  00 

1  077  000  00 

962  000  00 

1  U  #  «  UUu . uv 

10  000  00 

10  000.00 

XU  uuu . uu 

.  $57  374  045.75 

$30  861  045.75 

$23  202  000.00 

i 

25  402  500.00 

25  402  500.00 

- 

.  $31  971  545.75 

$  5  458  545.75 

$23  202  000.00 

(87) 


... 

. 

.  .  .  . 

.  ...  . 


. 

- 


. 


»  •  * 

. 

TABLE  No.  21 


SUMMARY  STATEMENT  OF  BOND  ISSUES  BY  YEARS 

(1910  to  1922  Inclusive) 


Year 

Total  Issue 

For  Construction 
Direct 

For  Funding 
Notes 

1910 

1911 

1912 

$  1  524  600.00 

$  524  600.00 

$  1  000  000.00 

1913 

6  139  000.00 

*480  000.00 

5  659  000.00 

1914 

1  017  000.00 

117  000.00 

900  000.00 

1915 

2  000  000.00 

' 

2  000  000.00 

1916 

1  270  000.00 

1  270  000.00 

1917 

1  875  000.00 

1  875  000.00 

1918 

2  268  000.00 

2  268  000.00 

1919 

1  715  000.00 

1  715  000.00 

1920 

1921 

4  225  000.00 

650  000.00 

3  575  000.00 

1922 

6  891  000.00 

**3  951  000  00 

2  940  000.00 

Total.  . 

$28  924  600.00 

$5  722  600  00 

$23  202  000  00 

*Refunding  of  bonds. 

**Funding  City’s  Share  of  Local  Assessments  $1,750,000. 


TABLE  No.  22 


DETAIL  OF  BOND  ISSUES  (1912  to  1922  Inclusive) 
In  Relation  to  Funding  of  Notes 


1912 


Kind  of  Bonds 

Amount  of 
Issue 

For  Con¬ 
struction- 
Direct 

For  Fund¬ 
ing  Notes 

Kind  of  Notes 
Funded 

Water  Improvement . 

Fire  House  Construction.  . 
Voting  Machine  Purchase. 
Schools — Building  and  Site 

Total . 

$1  000  000 
125  000 
49  600 
350  000 

$125  000 
49  600 
350  000 

$1  000  000 

Water  Improvement 

11  524  600 

$524  600 

$1  000  000 

1913 

Local  Improvement . 

Water  Improvement . 

Sewage  Disposal . 

Incinerator . 

Exposition  Park . 

Parks — Improvement  and 
Extension . 

Rochester  and  State  Line 
R.R . 

Total . 

$2  100  000 
1  849  000 
1  000  000 
100  000 
470  000 

140  000 

480  000 

*480  000 

$2  100  000 
1  849  000 
1  000  000 
100  000 
470  000 
10  000 
r 

5  000 

88  500 

31  500 

1 

5  000 

Local  Improvement 
Water  Improvement 
Sewage  Disposal 
Incinerator. 

Industrial  School  Purchase 
Durand-Eastman  Pk. — 
Pier  Construction 

Land  Purchase — Armory- 
Park 

Land  Purchase — Genesee 
Valley  Park 

Land  Purchase — Pinnacle 
Park 

Land  Purchase — Webster 
Park 

$6  139  000 

$480  000 

$5  659  000 

*For  Refunding  Rochester  and  State  Line  R.  R.  Bonds. 


1914 


Sewage  Disposal . 

Voting  Machine  Purchase 

$  500  000 
17  000 

$  17  000 

$500,000 

Sewage  Disposal 

Schools — Building  and  Site 

500  000 

100  000 

400  000 

School 

Total . 

$1  017  000 

$117  000 

$900  000 

1915 


Local  Improvement . 

$  600  000 

$  600 

000 

Local  Improvement 

Water  Improvement . 

300  000 

300 

000 

Water  Improvement 

Conduit  Construction.  .  .  . 

400  000 

400 

000 

Conduit  Construction 

Sewage  Disposal . 

300  000 

300 

000 

Sewage  Disposal 

{Schools— Building  and  Site 

400  000 

400 

000 

School 

Total . 

$2  000  000 

$2  000 

000 

TABLE  No.  22 — Continued 

1916 


Kind  of  Bonds 

Amount  of 
Issue 

For  Con¬ 
struction- 
Direct 

For  Fund¬ 
ing  Notes 

Kind  of  Notes 
Funded 

Local  Improvement . 

Water  Improvement . 

Sewage  Disposal . 

City  Garage . 

Library  Alteration  and 
Equipment . 

Playground . 

Park . 

$  300  000 
200  000 
250  000 
30  000 

30  000 

30  000 
30  000 

400  000 

• 

$  300  000 
200  000 
250  000 
30  000 

30  000 

30  000 
30  000 

400  000 

Local  Improvement 
Water  Improvement 
Sewage  Disposal 

City  Garage 

Library  Alteration 
Equipment 

Front  St.  Playground 
Land  Purchase — Seneca 
Park 

School 

Schools — Building  and  Site 

Total . 

$1  270  000 

$1  270  000 

1917 


f$  150  000 

Local  Improvement 

100  000 

Deepening  Genesee  Rvier 

Local  Improvement . 

$  500  000 

• 

— Sec.  1 

250  000 

Deepening  Genesee  River 

— Sec.  2 

Water  Improvement . 

150  000 

150  000 

Water  Improvement 

Conduit  Construction.  .  .  . 

535  000 

535  000 

Conduit  Construction 

Sewage  Disposal . 

350  000 

350  000 

Sewage  Disposal 

Tnr'inprat.nr.  . 

40  000 

40 . 000 

Incinerator 

Schools — Building  and  Site 

300  000 

300  000 

School 

Total . 

ii  875  000 

$1  875  000 

1918 


Local  Improvement . 

Water  Improvement . 

Conduit  Construction.  .  .  . 

Sewage  Disposal . 

Garbage  Disposal . 

Fire  House  Construction .  . 
Voting  Machine  Purchase 

Park  Improvement . 

Schools — Building  and  Site 


$  225  000 

$  225  000 

Deepening  Genesee  River 

— Sec.  2 

225  000 

225  000 

Water  Improvement 

350  000 

350 . 000 

Conduit  Construction 

225  000 

225  000 

Sewage  Disposal 

135  000 

135  000 

Garbage  Disposal 

75  000 

75  000 

Rochester  Land  Purchase 

70  000 

70  000 

Voting  Machine  Purchase 

f$  35  000 

Land  Purchase — Genesee 

aq  000 

J 

Valley  Park 

28  000 

Land  Purchase — High- 

l 

land  Park 

900  000 

900  000 

School 

$2  268  000 

$2  268  000 

Total 


TABLE  No.  22 — Continued 


_ 1920 _ 

NO  BOND  ISSUE  IN  1920 


1919 


Kind  of  Bonds 

Amount  of 
Issue 

For  Con¬ 
struction 
Direct 

For  Fund¬ 
ing  Notes 

Kind  of  Notes 
Funded 

Local  Improvement . 

Water  Improvement . 

Conduit  Construction.  .  .  . 

Sewage  Disposal . 

Municipal  Building  Con¬ 
struction . 

Schools — Building  and  Site 

Total . 

$  500  000 
175  000 
260  000 
80  000 

300  000 

400  000 

$  500  000 

175  000 
260  000 
80  000 

300  000 

400  000 

Local  Improvement 
Water  Improvement 
Conduit  Construction 
Sewage  Disposal 

Municipal  Building  Con¬ 
struction 

School 

$1  715  000 

$1  715  000 

1921 


Local  Improvement . 

Water  Improvement.  .  .  . 

Sewage  Disposal . 

School  Construction . 

Municipal  Building  Con¬ 
struction . 

Garbage  Disposal . 

Street  Cleaning  Equip¬ 
ment . 

Total . 


$  700  000 

$  700  000 

Local  Improvement 

375  000 

225  000 

150  000 

Water  Improvement 

100  000 

100  000 

1  775  000 

Sewage  Disposal 

2  000  000 

225  000 

1  550  000 

School  Construction 

300  000 

100  000 

200  000 

Municipal  Building  Con¬ 
struction 

650  000 

650  000 

Garbage  Disposal 

100  000 

100  000 

Equipment 

$4  225  000 

$  650  000 

$3  575  000 

1922 


Local  Improvement . 

$  250  000 

$  250  000 

Municipal  Improvement. 

fl  750  000 

650  000 

$1  100  000 

Sewage  Disposal . 

50  000 

50  000 

School  Construction . 

3  000  000 

1  475  000 

1  525  000 

Municipal  Building  Con- 

struction . 

100  000 

50  000 

50  000 

Garbage  Disposal.  ...... 

90  000 

90  000 

Canal  Land  Purchase. . .  . 

1  526  000 

1  526  000 

Municipal  Land  Purchase 

125  000 

125  000 

Total . 

$6  891  000 

$3  951  000 

$2  940  000 

Local  Improvement 
Municipal  Improvement 
Sewage  Disposal 
School  Construction 

Municipal  Building  Con¬ 
struction 
Garbage  Disposal 
Canal  Land  Purchase 
Municipal  Land  Purchase 


fFor  Funding  City’s  Share  of  Local  Assessments — $1,750,000.00. 


YEARLY  DEBT  STATEMENTS 


4- 

ooooooooooooooooooooooo 

SHONOOOOOIOIONIOIOIOO^O^COCO^OO 

g 

• r- i 

■^HION40^0INCOHCOOOCOHIOOOCD(NIONIOCO 

03CClNHi0Wffi0300(NOC3C0MM0)OHNiO40)H 

WM-HG0C0O4HioiCOc0C^OlN^i0C0CMc04i0i0 

o 

00O03(NhO©N10ONh00(N403CD>CSN(0U5N 

NCC(3000000N!Nc003©0304004»OC;OnNNO 

©NGO>-^COC3t^COrHCOCOCOOrHCOCOrH^H(MlOHO 

r 

CCOrH^rHC^cO^TtUOdOOCiOHCOcDNOOCliOiO 

+-> 

r\ 

i0cDW00C0030344cDtHioO03NcD(N(N(NHiH(N00 

NcO’H'-'OCONOONCOO^iC^diOOOCOO-HONO 

& 

> 

OcOOcO<N(NOOl^COeOCO(MkO(Mi— (GOCOOCi— IOIOIOCO 
rt|wNdnooioNdiO’fcooncNr^THNnco'^ 
noooooioncocicoox4rHTfC3C^ecoooon4>o 

(U 

'd 

c 

ooooo3co^-HconwcoLo^oco»nwococ»Nco4 

OCOrt!OCOCOCv)t^OOCO'+iOOCM^t^OcOr^iOOOt^C3(M 

■^CDOONOcOCO'H(NOOO»OCDn’-(03cONCONrH^ 

K- 

-“tHHNNNNHHnni-iooooQOcoojeo 

>0'4t^C^'4rHr-(CDCO'^03'rfO^CO'^IG0000003>03>00(N 

Oi-^WiOOJrHC^HMHT^NOWiOdiOMCOCOCOOfH 

<U 

Q 

co^io^^nr^ioc^oocoio,4cci^fC53icr>Ttir^^HC3coo3)0 

iOC3iO»OfOHOOrOOOO'^iONnOOOC003CDNHiON 

44) 

<D 

£ 

Or-(030>c003O^iHcD4N  00  00i0NC0Tt<C0C0O03<n 
-H03C003^Hi0iOC0iCCMO0003O'^03n»OG0®NCi0 
ocM<Ncvqcoc3'ti03C3^foocC'^'^^rtor-ioocooot^03'^r' 

OOOOOOHHHMCqrticDNOOfflHNOOOXNiOC) 

t—H  t-H  r-H  t-H  t-H  H  r— 1  r— I  t-H  t-H  r-H  r— 1  t-H  t-H  t-H  C4  t-H  t-H  t-H  C4  CO 

COlOCDOOcOt^‘OOOcOCO^'*flt^''^©3CO<M©303TtiCOCOaO 

03^HL0'^OC3C000CS)00»Ot003>TtiCMiO^C0^i'4iO0300 

c3 

44) 

n 

^(NOOGOOOOOOdcOCHOMHOOHOWCOOiNOJ^ 

fONi-H^ocD^iOM-HQONcOOOOW^OcDO^OOn 

COMCOCMrHCO^CDl04©»ONr-ICOOOrHOOCOt^COOOX 

T3 

OiOCOHNOiONNHCOCOOOHr-iiOiOH^^iQCOH 

■^NOCCCON03CDCOOiOcDC003nOWOO,t^OcDO 

CDC0C0^i0C0C0XN  00  03rH(MMmOr^cDMC0O03^ 

<v 

rH  r-H  r-H  t-H  t-H  t-H  CO  Is*  Is-  00  00 

< 

• 

c/3 

C 

O 

• 

44> 

a 

a 

<u 

Water 

W 

C/3 

C 

COtOcOGOc01'^‘-OOOCOcO^H4<r^^C'3CDCv3©3<MTfiCOCOOO 

OrHiOrriOC3COX(MOOiCiOC6^n<0^©OTHioC300 

pa 

W) 

^ncoooooooocDcocDrHoc<iHGiOrHonf003N03'^ 

WNrH'rHc0CD4i0C0H00NC0O00C^4OcD03400(N 

CDMfO(N'-tCO-HcDi040iONrHCCOOTHOOOONCOOOOO 

d 
• »— < 

d 

OiOMHNOiOM(NHOOCOOOHrHiOi003COcOOCOT-f 

^NOC0C0N03C0®OiO©M03(NOC00003OO0003 

OWW^iOcDcOOONOOdHiMnniONCD^OOOiON 

•  t-H 

02 

HHHHpHHHr-IHOQniM 

ooo3coooooco^imoooomo*oooooconho 

00L0  03OOOiOOiOOON03^NOOOCM0JOO 

44) 

GOcOWOOOOCOd^ON^iOiONOOiOOiOGiO'^OJiO 

G0ONOONC0004OMMC0n00ONOiMNcDdai 

NNIOOONCOOO^OOOOOOONCDOHOOCCUOIOON 

o 

Eh 

OcOtM^H^fa^iOCO'^OOCJiOcOOJOCOOOcOb-CO'^fCO'^ 
iOCO^COOOOO^rH^iONN(noO!NiOnOC300^4 
Mc0»CNHi0H00NnNNNNOO03i0»0N  00  03CO 

tuO 

C 

•  T— < 

rfj 

HOOOHHMMNCOCOIONOOCSHM^IONO^H 
t-H  t—H  t-H  t—H  t-H  ^H  r-H  t—H  r-H  t-H  r-H  r-H  r-H  ^H  r-H  C4  d  d  d  CO  CO 

c 

aj 

44) 

in 

4-> 

3 

o 

GOCiCOOOOOOOOOOOt^LOiOOOOOOOOO 

OOLOOiOOOOOOOOt^-Oit^-t^OOOOOOOO 

m 

CD 

44) 

O 

QOtOWOOOOOOON^iOiOMCOOOOOOOO 
OOCDNOOOOOOONNMNOOMOOOOOOO 
t^l>*0©00©0©©00  00<M--liO*OlOOO©0©0 

a> 

Q 

£ 

CO^NCD^OCD^OiOlOO^rHOdOCDiOCO^^MtO 

NNiO^OiNNcOrHiHOJiHHcOOSiOOOOO^NOr-KN 

^coo3HnC'Hooo3on40dOu:iHC34c;coccoi 

C/3 

C/3 

Nhh(MhhMNhimWiOOhC^h(MhCO'H»C*Q>C 

m 

o 

O 

OOOOOOOCO'^CSlOOOOOOOOOOCO'N^-iO 

OOOOOOiOOtoOOOOOOOOOOOOfNcDO 

C/3 

T3 

c 

OOOOOOOCOOJ^OOOOO^IOIOOIOQO^OIO 

ooooot^cooo^roooooor-o-0(Mi^cDT^a3 

OOOOONCOQO^OOOOOH^OOOOOIOIOON 

O 

pq 

■^!NiCiOOOO(M‘003HcOiOWCWHH'tncO'H03 

t^ajoooooocooxoiwooiOrHNcooaNiocorHMH 

ON*0<0030303C3NO,tC0NrHi0i0Ni0-HN'^C0N 

OlCCOOOOOlOiOOOOOOHNNOOnC^LOcOdiO 

t-H  t-H  t-H  ^H  t-H  t-H  t-H  t-H  C3  ©3  ©3  ©3  ©3  ©3  CO 

m 

Year 

Dec. 

31 

OHC3W^»OcONOO©OHC3WTtUO©NOOffiOrH03 

OOOOOOOOOOt-h^h^h-h^h^ht-it— 

©©©©©©©©©©©©©©©©©©©©©©ffi 

Exemption  of  water  debt  issued  after  1904  made  applicable  to  Rochester  by  constitutional  amendment  of  1917. 


TABLE  No.  24 


REDEMPTION  OF  BONDS  AND  NOTES  FROM  SINKING  FUNDS 

(Or  Through  Sinking  Funds) 

(1910  to  1922  Inclusive) 


Additions  to  Sinking  Funds  orior  to  1910.  .  . 

$2  037  476.83 

1  205  800.00 
831  676.83 

4  884  008.75 

Less  payments  out  of  Sinking  Funds  prior  to  1910 . 

Balance  in  Sinking  Funds  December  31,  1909 . 

Additions — 1910  to  1922,  inclusive: 

From  tax  levy  (directly  or  indirectly*) . $2  734  869.98 

From  interest  on  balances  and  investments  and  mis¬ 
cellaneous .  2  149  138.77 

Less  payments — 1910  to  1922,  inclusive,  as  specified  below  by  years.  . .  . 

Balance  in  Sinking  Funds  December  31,  1922 . 

$5  715  685.58 
2  197  876.96 

3  517  808.62 

*Note:  Serial  or  Sinking  Funds  installments — direct  Transfer  of  fund  surpluses — 
indirect. 

PAYMENTS  BY  YEARS 

1910 

Refunding  Water  Bonds  (cancelled- before  maturity) . 

High  School  Bonds  (Cancelled  before  Maturity) . 

Public  Market  Notes . 

Total . 

$133  000.00 
20  000.00 
5  000.00 

$158  000.00 

1911 

Park  Bonds  ($100  000.00  bonds  cancelled  before  maturity) . 

$  87  617.80 

1912 

Consolidated  Bonds  (redeemed  at  maturity) . 

Water  Pipe  Extension  Bonds  (cancelled  before  maturity) . 

School  Bonds  of  1906 . 

Total . 

$100  000.00 
14  914.67 
189.48 

$115  104.15 

1913 

Public  Market  Bonds  (cancelled  before  maturity) . 

$  16  000.00 
.  145  000.00 
60  000.00 

4  000.26 

Rochester  Nunda  and  Penn  R.  R.  Bonds  (redeemed  at  maturity) . 

Rochester  and  State  Line  R.  R.  Bonds  (redeemed  at  maturity) . 

($520,000.00  of  above  refunded). 

Voting  Machine  Purchase  Notes . 

Total . 

$225  000.26 

1914 

Water  Pipe  Extension  Bonds  (redeemed  at  maturity) . 

Public  Market  Notes . 

Voting  Machine  Purchase  Notes . 

$235  000.00 
10  000.00 
4  000.00 

Total . 

$249  000.00 

TABLE  No.  24 — Continued 


1915 

Public  Market  Notes . 

$  5  000 . 00 
1  054.75 
1  700.00 

Voting  Machine  Purchase  Notes . 

Voting  Machine  Purchase  Bonds  (serial  installment) . 

Total . 

$7  754.75 

1916 


Voting  Machine  Purchase  Bonds  (serial  installment) 


1  700.00 


1917 


High  School  Bonds  (serial  installment) . 

Rochester  and  State  Line  R.  R.  Bonds  (cancelled  before  maturity). 

Voting  Machine  Purchase  Bonds  (serial  installment) . 

Park  Bonds  (serial  installment) . 

City  Garage  Bonds  (serial  installment). . . . 

Public  Library  Bonds  (serial  installment) . 

Playground  Bonds  (serial  installment) . 

School  Bonds  (serial  installment) . 


$25  000.00 
5  000.00 
1  700.00 
1  500.00 
1  500.00 
1  500.00 
1  500.00 
39  000.00 


Total 


$  76  700.00 


1918 


High  School  Bonds  (serial  installment) . 

Hemlock  Lake  Watershed  Bonds  (redeemed  at  maturity) . 

Public  Market  Bonds  (cancelled  before  maturity) . 

Rochester  and  State  Line  R.R.  Bonds  (cancelled  before  maturity) 

Fire  House  Construction  Bonds  (cancelled  before  maturity) . 

School  Bonds  (serial  installment) . 

Incinerator  Bonds  (serial  installment) . 

Voting  Machine  Purchase  Bonds  (serial  installment) . 

Park  Bonds  (serial  installment) . 

City  Garage  Bonds  (serial  installment) . 

Public  Library  Bonds  (serial  installment) . 

Playground  Bonds  (serial  installment) . 


$  25  000.00 
200  000.00 
50  000.00 
25  000.00 
25  000.00 
24  500.00 
2  000.00 
1  700.00 
1  500.00 
1  500.00 
1  500.00 
1  500.00 


Total 


$359  200.00 


1919 


High  School  Bonds  (serial  installment) . 

School  Bonds  (serial  installment) . _ . 

Voting  Machine  Purchase  Bonds  (serial  installment) 

Park  Bonds  (serial  installment) . 

Garbage  Disposal  Bonds  (serial  installment) . 

Fire  House  Construction  Bonds  (serial  installment). 
Incinerator  Construction  Bonds  (serial  installment). 

City  Garage  Bonds  (serial  installment) . 

Public  Library  Bonds  (serial  installment) . 

Playground  Bonds  (serial  installment) . 


25  000.00 
54  500.00 
5  200.00 
4  500.00 
4  500.00 
2  500.00 
2  000.00 
1  500.00 
1  500.00 
1  500.00 


$102  700.00 


Total 


TABLE  No.  24 — Continued 


1920 


High  School  Bonds  (serial  installment) . 

School  Bonds  (serial  installment) . 

Voting  Machine  Purchase  Bonds  (serial  installment) . 

Park  Bonds  (serial  installment) . 

Garbage  Disposal  Bonds  (serial  installment) . 

Fire  House  Construction  Bonds  (serial  installment) . 

Incinerator  Construction  Bonds  (serial  installment) . 

City  Garage  Bonds  (serial  installment) . 

Public  Library  Bonds  (serial  installment) . 

Playground  Bonds  (serial  installment) . 

Bridge  Bonds  (redeemed  at  maturity) . 

Municipal  Building  Construction  Bonds  (serial  installment  ) 


$  25  000.00 
42  500.00 
5  200.00 
4  500.00 
4  500.00 
2  500.00 
2  000.00 
1  500.00 
1  500.00 
1  500.00 
100  000.00 
10  000.00 


Total 


$200  700.00 


1921 


High  School  Bonds  (serial  installment) . 

School  Bonds  (serial  installment) . 

Voting  Machine  Purchase  Bonds  (serial  installment) . 

Park  Bonds  (serial  installment) . 

Garbage  Disposal  Bonds  (serial  installment) . 

Fire  House  Construction  Bonds  (serial  installment) . 

Incinerator  Construction  Bonds  (serial  installment) . 

City  Garage  Bonds  (serial  installment) . 

Public  Library  Bonds  (serial  installment) . 

Playground  Bonds  (serial  installment) . 

Bridge  Bonds  (redeemed  at  maturity . 

Municipal  Building  Construction  Bonds  (serial  installment) 


$  25  000.00 
42  500.00 
5  200.00 
4  500.00 
4  500.00 
2  500.00 
2  000.00 
1  500.00 
1  500.00 
1  500.00 
100  000.00 
10  000.00 


Total 


$200  700.00 


1922 


High  School  Bonds  (serial  installment) . 

School  Bonds  (serial  installment . 

Voting  Machine  Bonds  (serial  installment) . 

Park  Bonds  (serial  installment) . 

Garbage  Disposal  Bonds  (serial  installment) . 

Fire  House  Construction  (serial  installment) . 

Incinerator  Construction  Bonds  (serial  installment) . 

City  Garage  Bonds  (serial  installment) . 

Public  Library  Bonds  (serial  installment) . 

Playground  Bonds  (serial  installment) . 

Bridge  Bonds  (redeemed  at  maturity) . 

Municipal  Building  Construction  (serial  installment) 

Public  Market  Bonds  (redeemed  at  maturity) . 

Water  Bonds  (serial  installment) . 

Equipment  Bonds  (serial  installment) . 

Sewage  Bonds  (serial  installment) . 


$  25  000.00 
133  500.00 
5  200.00 
4  500.00 
4  500.00 
2  500.00 
2  000.00 
1  500.00 
1  500.00 
1  500.00 
100  000.00 
25  000.00 
78  000.00 

4  000.00 
20  000.00 

5  000.00 


Total 


$413  700.00 


TABLE  No.  24 — Continued 


SUMMARY  OF  PAYMENTS  BY  YEARS 


1910. 

1911. 

1912. 

1913. 

1914. 

1915. 

1916. 

1917. 

1918. 

1919. 

1920. 

1921. 

1922. 


Total 


$ 

158 

000. 

00 

87 

617 

80 

115 

104 

15 

225 

000 

26 

249 

000 

00 

7 

754 

.75 

1 

700 

00 

76 

700 

00 

359 

200 

.00 

102 

700 

00 

200 

700 

00 

200 

700 

00 

413 

700 

00 

$2 

197 

876 

.96 

TABLE  No.  25 

SUMMARY  DEBT  SERVICE  EXPENDITURES 

OUT  OF  BUDGET 

(1910  to  1922  Inclusive) 


Year 

Schools 

Other 

General 

Total 

General 

Water 

Market 

Grand 

Total 

1910 

$  96  834.60 

$343  604.25 

$5  061.81 

$  445  500.66 

1911 

125  002.17 

339  222.26 

5  040.00 

469  264.43 

1912 

130  003.38 

361  012.88 

5  040.00 

496  056.26 

1913 

$  48  543.67 

$  166  356.33 

214  900.00 

342  112.29 

4  750.91 

561  763.20 

1914 

82  011.90 

169  177.22 

251  189.12 

376  984.29 

4  687.69 

632  861.10 

1915 

98  776.82 

246  412.07 

345  188.89 

398  651.86 

4  496.88 

748  337.63 

1916 

146  932.23 

341  506.02 

488  438.25 

412  373.40 

4  480.00 

905  291.65 

1917 

165  852.92 

326  268.49 

492  121.41 

447  755.02 

4  480.00 

944  356.43 

1918 

208  389.13 

352  145.11 

560  534.24 

463  756.23 

3  605.00 

1  027  895.47 

1919 

331  751.16 

382  585.21 

714  336.37 

492  533.60 

2  730.00 

1  209  599.97 

1920 

605  842.34 

553  344.95 

1  159  187.29 

495  015.64 

2  730.00 

1  656  932.93 

1921 

1  334  264.85 

717  071.16 

2  051  336.01 

519  527.48 

2  730.00 

2  573  593.49 

1922 

2  173  397.05 

1  506  390.84 

3  679  787.89 

524  142.96 

227.50 

4  204  158.35 

TABLE  No.  26 

EXPENDITURES  FOR  GENERAL  DEBT  SERVICE 

(1910  to  1922  Inclusive) 

(Excluding  Debt  Service  Items  Carried  by  Water,  Market  and 

Assessment  Funds) 


Year 

Interest 

Redemption 
Direct  or  Through 
Sinking  Fund 

Total 

Debt  Service 

1910 

$  85  668.83 

$11  165.77 

$  96  834.60 

1911 

93  402.17 

31  600.00 

125  002.17 

1912 

101  403.38 

28  600.00 

130  003.38 

1913 

136  800.00 

78  100.00 

214  900.00 

1914 

162  089.12 

89  100.00 

251  189.12 

1915 

247  159.89 

98  029.00 

345  188.89 

1916 

352  788.25 

135  650.00 

488  438.25 

1917 

339  846.41 

152  275.00 

492  121.41 

1918 

390  400.36 

*170  133.88 

560  534.24 

1919 

457  896.37 

*256  440.00 

714  336.37 

1920 

582  797.29 

*576  390.00 

1  159  187.29 

1921 

747  246.01 

*1  304  090.00 

2  051  336.01 

1922 

973  597.89 

*2  706  190.00 

3  679  787.89 

^Includes  redemption  of  following  notes: 

(1)  1918 — School  Repair  and  Equipment.  . . $  13  251.38 

(2)  1919 — School  Repair  and  Equipment .  50  000.00 

(3)  1920 — War  Emergency .  100  000.00 

School  Repair  and  Equipment .  250  000 . 00 

(4)  1921 — General  Current  Expense .  105  000.00 

School  Current  Expense .  795  000.00 

(5)  1922— General  Current  Expense .  692  000.00 

School  Current  Expense .  1  437  000.00 


TABLE  No.  27 

EXPENDITURES  FOR  WATER  DEBT  SERVICE 

(1910  to  1922  Inclusive) 


Year 

Interest 

Redemption 
Through  Sinking 
Fund 

Total  Debt 
Service 

1910 

$280  104.25 

$63  500.00 

$343  604.24 

1911 

290  722.26 

48  500.00 

339  222.26 

1912 

312  512.88 

48  500.00 

361  012.88 

1913 

293  622.29 

48  490.00 

342  112.29 

1914 

326  494.29 

50  490.00 

376  984.29 

1915 

343  161.86 

55  490.00 

398  651.86 

1916 

354  883.40 

57  490.00 

412  373.40 

1917 

383  415.02 

64  340.00 

447  755.02 

1918 

399  416.23 

64  340.00 

463  756.23 

1919 

420  943.60 

71  590.00 

492  533.60 

1920 

419  075.64 

75  940.00 

495  015.64 

1921 

431  087.48 

88  440.00 

519  527.48 

1922 

435  702.96 

88  440.00 

524  142.96 

TABLE  No.  28 

EXPENDITURES  FOR  PUBLIC  MARKET  DEBT  SERVICE 

(1910  to  1922  Inclusive) 


Year 

Interest  out  of 
Budget 

Surplus  of  Market 
Fund  Transferred 
to  Sinking  Fund 

Total  Debt 
Service 

1910 

$5  061.81 

$  4  844.87 

$  9  906.68 

1911 

5  040.00 

5  300.00. 

10  340.00 

1912 

5  040.00 

8  000.00 

13  040.00 

1913 

4  750.91 

13  000.00 

17  750.91 

1914 

4  687.69 

*12  000.00 

16  687.69 

1915 

4  496.88 

14  700.00 

19  196.88' 

1916 

4  480.00 

15  035.00 

19  515.00 

1917 

4  480.00 

13  045.80 

17  525.80 

1918 

3  605.00 

13  750.00 

17  355.00 

1919 

2  730.00 

12  046.55 

14  776.55 

1920 

2  730.00 

14  500.00 

17  230.00 

1921 

2  730.00 

14  500.00 

17  230.00 

1922 

227.50 

2  293.60 

2  521.10 

*From  tax  levy. 


TABLE  No.  30 

NOTES  OUTSTANDING 
December  31,  1922 


A.  Current  Fund  Obligations: 

1.  Overdue  Tax  Notes . 

$  315  000 

1  940  000 

$2  255  000 

2.  Current  Expense  Notes: 

School  Deficit . SI  225  000 

Miscellaneous  Departments  Deficit .  715  000 

B.  Assessment  Fund  Obligations: 

1.  Local  Improvement  Notes . 

2.  Brown  Street  Subway  Notes . 

3.  Western  Sewage  Notes . 

$1  550  000 
230  000 
240  000 

$2  020  000 

C.  Loan  Fund  Obligations: 

1.  Sewage  Disposal  Notes . 

2.  School  Construction  Notes . 

$  20  000 

1  425  000 
20  000 
25  000 
160  000 

1  650  000 

3.  Municipal  Building  Construction  Notes . 

4.  Municipal  Land  Purchase  Notes . 

5.  Water  Improvement  Notes . 

Total  Outstanding . 

$5  925  000 

Ge 

Class 

ring  Fund  Provision 

S.  F. 
Amount 

Amount 
Outstanding, 
Dec.  31,  1922 

A.  W  j 

S.  F.  at  present  time 

$  170  000.00 

(to 

ept  charter  S.  F. 

2  697  000.00 

by 

F.  1  %  installment 

$18  490 

1  849  000.00 

fu 

ept  charter  S.  F. 

360  000.00 

ept  charter  S.  F. 

500  000.00 

ept  charter  S.  F. 

1  000  000.00 

ept  charter  S.  F. 

300  000.00 

ept  charter  S.  F. 

950  000.00 

F.  1%  installment 

7  000 

700  000.00 

F.  1%  installment 

2  000 

200  000.00 

F.  1%  installment 

6  850 

685  000.00 

F.  1%  installment 

5  750 

575  000.00 

F.  1%  installment 

4  350 

435  000.00 

nking  Fund  to  Amortize 

12  500 

371  000.00 

500.00 

5  000.00 

19  500.00 

B.  Ass 

500  000.00 

(to 

2  100  000.00 

by 

1  000  000.00 

m< 

600  000.00 

500  000.00 

700  000.00 

240  000.00 

IKE  LIBRARY 

QF  TIE 

UNIVERSITY  PF  ILLINOIS 


TABLE  No.  29 


BONDS  OUTSTANDING— December  31,  1922 


General 

Classification 


A.  Water: 

(to  be  carried 
by  water 
fund) 


B.  Assessment 
(to  be  carriec 
by  assess¬ 
ment  funds) 


C.  General 

(to  be  carriec 
by  general 
fund) 


Kind  of 
Bonds 


1.  Term 


Purpose  of  Issue 


2.  Serial 


1.  Term 


2.  Serial 


1.  Term 


2.  Serial 


Total . 


Hemlock  Lake  Watershed 
Refunding  Water 
Water  Improvement 
Refunding  Water 
Additional  Water  Supply 
Water  Improvement 
Additional  Water  Supply 
Additional  Water  Supply 
Water  Impr.  and  Conduit  Con. 
Water  Improvement 
Water  Impr.  and  Conduit  Con 
Water  Impr.  and  Conduit  Con 
Water  Impr.  and  Conduit  Con 
Water  Improvement . 


Water  Works — Charlotte 
Water  Works— Charlotte 
Water  annexed  territory 

Local  Improvement 
Local  Improvement 
Local  Improvement 
Local  Improvement 
Local  Improvement 
Local  Improvement 

Local  Improvement 
Local  Improvement 
Local  Improvement 
Local  Improvement 
E.  S.  T.  S. — part  2 
E.  S.  T.  S. — part  3 
E.  S.  T.  S. — part  4 

Sewage  Disposal 
Sewage  Disposal 
Sewage  Disposal 
Sewage  Disposal 
Sewage  Disposal 
Sewage  Disposal 
Sewage  Disposal 
Incinerator  Construction 
Convention  Hall  Purchase 
Exposition  Park  Purchase 
Fire  House  Construction 
Voting  Machine  Purchase 
Park 

Parks— Impr.  and  Ext. 
Schools — Building  and  Site 
Schools 
Schools 

Rochester  and  St.  Line  R.  R 
(Second  Refunding) 
Garbage  Disposal 
Garbage  Disposal 

Municipal  Improvement 
Garbage  Disposal 
Canal  Purchase 
Incinerator 
Sewage  Disposal 
Sewage  Disposal 
City  Garbage 
Library  Alt.  and  Equip. 

Fire  House  Construction 
Voting  Machine  Purchase 
Voting  Machine  Purchase 
Equipment  (Street  Cleaning) 
Municipal  Buildings 
Municipal  Buildings 
Municipal  Buildings 
Parks 

Park  Improvement 

Municipal  Land  Purchase 

Playgrounds 

Schools 

Schools 

Schools 

Schools 

Schools 

Schools 

Annexed  territory  serials: 
Aggregate  schools 
Aggregate  Sew.  and  SidewalJ 
Electric  Light— Charlotte 
Municipal  Bldg— Charlotte 


Date 

of 

Issue 

Term 

Date  of 
Maturity 

Original 

Principal 

"nterest 

Rate 

Annual 

Serial 

Install. 

Sinking  Fund  Provision 

S.  F. 
Amount 

Amount 
Outstanding, 
Dec.  31,  1922 

1904 

20 

1924  $ 

170  000.00 

3)4% 

Surplus  in  S.  F.  at  present  time 

$  170  000.00 

1903 

30 

1933 

3  000  000.00 

3  )4% 

None,  except  charter  S.  F. 

2  697  000. OU 

1913 

20 

1933 

1  849  000.00 

4^% 

Special  S.  F.  1%  installment 

US  490 

1  849  000.00 

1905 

30 

1935 

410  000.00 

3M% 

None,  except  charter  S.  F. 

360  000.00 

1892 

50 

1942 

500  000.00 

3^% 

None,  except  charter  S.  F. 

500  000.00 

1912 

30 

1942 

1  000  000.00 

4  % 

None,  except  charter  S.  F. 

1  000  000.00 

1893 

50 

1943 

300  000.00 

4  % 

None,  except  charter  S.  F. 

300  000.00 

1894 

50 

1944 

950  000.00 

3M% 

None,  except  charter  S.  F. 

950  000.00 

1915 

30 

1945 

700  000.00 

4)4% 

Special  S.  F.  1  %  installment 

7  000 

700  000.00 

1916 

30 

1946 

200  000.00 

4  % 

Special  S.  F.  1%  installment 

2  000 

200  000.00 

1917 

30 

1947 

685  000.00 

4  % 

Special  S.  F.  1  %  installment 

6  850 

685  000 . 00 

1918 

30 

1948 

575  000.00 

4)4% 

Special  S.  F.  1%  installment 

5  750 

575  000.00 

1919 

30 

1949 

435  000.00 

4)4% 

Special  S.  F.  1%  installment 

4  350 

435  000.00 

1921 

30 

1951 

375  000.00 

5  % 

Special  Sinking  Fund  to  Amortize 

12  500 

371  000.00 

1916 

7 

1917—1923 

3  500.00 

4^% 

500.00 

500 . 00 

1916 

11 

1917—1927 

11  000.00 

4  H% 

1  000.00 

D  uuu . uu 

1918 

17 

1919—1935 

25  500.00 

5  % 

1  500.00 

19  5UU.UU 

1904 

20 

1924 

500  000.00 

3K% 

None 

500  000.00 

1913 

20 

1933 

2  100.000  00 

4)4% 

None 

2  100  000. UU 

1908 

30 

1938* 

1  000  000.00 

4 

None 

1  000  000.00 

1915 

30 

1945 

600  000.00 

4)4% 

None 

600  000.00 

1919 

30 

1949 

500  000.00 

4  )4% 

None 

500  000.00 

1921 

20 

1941 

700  000.00 

5  % 

None 

700  000.00 

1916 

30 

1917—1946 

300  000.00 

4  H% 

10  000.00 

240  000.00 

1917 

30 

1918—1947 

500  000.00 

4  % 

17  000.00 

— $7,000  last  year 

415  000.00 

1918 

30 

1919—1948 

225  000.00 

4)4% 

7  500.00 

195  000.00 

1922 

20 

1923—1942 

250  000.00 

4)4% 

12  000.00 

— $22,000  last  year 

250  000 . 00 

1892 

6 

1922—1927 

150  000.00 

4  % 

25  000.00 

125  000.00 

1892 

10 

1928—1937 

250  000.00 

3)4% 

25  000.00 

250  000 . 00 

1904 

4 

1938—1941 

100  000.00 

3  )4% 

25  000.00 

100  000. UU 

1913 

20 

1933 

1  000  000.00 

4)4% 

Special  S.  F.  1%  installment 

10  000 

1  000  000.00 

1914 

30 

1944 

500  000.00 

4)4% 

Special  S.  F.  1  %  installment 

5  OUU 

500  000.00 

1915 

30 

1945 

300  000.00 

4)4% 

Special  S.  F.  1%  installment 

3  000 

300  000.00 

1916 

30 

1946 

250  000.00 

4  % 

Special  S.  F.  1%  installment 

2  500 

250  000.00 

1917 

30 

1947 

350  000.00 

4  % 

Special  S.  F.  1  %  installment 

3  50U 

350  000.00 

1918 

30 

1948 

225  000.00 

4)4% 

Special  S.  F.  1%  installment 

2  250 

225  000.00 

1919 

30 

1949 

80  000.00 

4)4% 

Special  S.  F.  1%  installment 

8UU 

80  000.00 

1913 

20 

1933 

100  000.00 

4)4% 

Special  S.  F.  1%  installment 

1  000 

100  000.00 

1909 

20 

1929 

100  000.00 

4  % 

None,  except  charter  general  S.  F. 

100  000.00 

1913 

20 

1933 

470  000.00 

4  H% 

Special  S.  F.  1%  installment 

4  700 

470  000.00 

1912 

12 

1924 

125  000.00 

3  )4% 

Special  S.  F.  to  Amortize 

9  000 

100  000.00 

1912 

12 

1924 

49  600.00 

4  % 

Special  S.  F.  to  Amortize 

4  000 

49  600.00 

1888 

40 

1928 

300  000.00 

3  % 

Special  S.  F. — 

3  600 

200  000.00 

1896 

40 

1936 

60  000.00 

3)4% 

1%  installment 

60  000.00 

1913 

20 

1933 

140  000.00 

4)4% 

Special  S.  F. — 1%  installment 

1  400 

140  000.00 

1912 

30 

1942 

350  000.00 

4  % 

Special  S.  F.  to  Amortize 

9  000 

350  OUU . 00 

1914 

30 

1944 

500  000.00 

414% 

Special  S.  F.  to  Amortize 

9  000 

500  UOO.OO 

1915 

30 

1945 

400  000.00 

4)4% 

Special  S.  F.  to  Amortize 

9  000 

400  000.00 

1913 

20 

1933 

480  000.00 

4  >4% 

Special  S.  F.  2%  installment 

9  600 

480  000.00 

1921 

30 

1951 

650  000.00 

5  % 

Special  S.  F.  to  Amortize 

21  700 

650  000.00 

1922 

30 

1952 

90  000.00 

434% 

Special  S.  F.  to  Amortize 

3  000 

90  000.00 

1922 

30 

1923—1951 

1  750  000.00 

434% 

58  000.00 

— $68,000  last  year 

1  750  000.00 

1918 

30 

1919—1948 

135  000.00 

4)4% 

4  500.00 

117  000.00 

1922 

30 

1923—1952 

1  526  000.00 

434% 

50  000.00 

— 76,000  last  year 

1  526  000.00 

1917 

20 

1919—1937 

40  000.00 

4  % 

2  000.00 

30  000.00 

1921 

20 

1922—1941 

100  000.00 

5  % 

5  000.00 

95  000 . 00 

1922 

20 

1923—1942 

50  000.00 

4 14% 

2  000.00 

—10  years — 3,000  10  years 

50  000.00 

1916 

20 

1917—1936 

30  000 . 00 

4M% 

1  500.00 

21  000.00 

1916 

20 

1917—1936 

30  000.00 

4  M% 

1  500.00 

21  000.00 

1918 

30 

1919—1948 

75  000.00 

4 14% 

2  500.00 

65  000 . 00 

1914 

10 

1915—1924 

17  000.00 

4  % 

1  700.00 

3  400.00 

1918 

20 

1919—1938 

70  000.00 

414% 

3  500.00 

56  000.00 

1921 

5 

1922—1926 

100  000.00 

5  % 

20  000.00 

80  000.00 

1919 

30 

1920—1949 

300  000 . 00 

434% 

10  000.00 

270  000.00 

1921 

20 

1922—1941 

300  000.00 

5  % 

15  000.00 

285  000.00 

1922 

20 

1923—1942 

100  000.00 

434% 

5  000.00 

100  000.00 

1916 

20 

1917—1936 

30  000.00 

4K% 

1  500  00 

21  000.00 

1918 

20 

1919—1938 

63  000.00 

434% 

3  000.00 

51  000.00 

1922 

20 

1923—1942 

125  000.00 

4)4% 

6  000.00 

— 11,000  last  year 

125  000.00 

1916 

20 

1917—1936 

30  000.00 

4  H% 

1  500.00 

21  000.00 

1916 

30 

1917—1946 

400  000.00 

434% 

13  500.00 

319  000.00 

1917 

30 

1918—1947 

300  000.00 

4  % 

10  000.00 

250  000.00 

1918 

30 

1919—1948 

900  000.00 

434% 

30  000.00 

780  000.00 

1919 

30 

1920—1949 

400  000.00 

4)4% 

13  000.00 

— 23,000  last  year 

361  000.00 

1921 

30 

1922—1951 

2  000  000.00 

5  % 

66  000.00 

— 86,000.00  last  year 

1  934  000 . 0C 

1922 

30 

1923—1952 

3  000  000.00 

434% 

100  000.00 

3  000  000.00 

9  940.00 

161  020. 0C 

cs 

20  074.61 

34  775. 0C 

1916 

11 

1917—1927 

434% 

400 . 00 

2  000. 0C 

1916 

10 

1917—1926 

4.85? 

9  1  000 . 00 

4  000. 0C 

$35  719  795. 0( 

♦Optional  after  September  1,  1918. 


TABLE  No.  31 


ASSETS  OF  SINKING  FUNDS 
As  of  December  31,  1922 


Water: 


General  Water  Sinking  Fund . 

Hemlock  Lake  Watershed  Fund . 

Water  Sinking  Fund — 1913 . 

Water  Sinking  Fund — 1915 . 

Water  Sinking  Fund — 1916 . 

Water  Sinking  Fund — 1917 . 

Water  Sinking  Fund — 1918 . 

Waiter  Sinking  Fund — 1919 . 

Water  Sinking  Fund — 1921 . 

General: 

General  Sinking  Fund . 

Park  Sinking  Fund — 1896 . 

•  Park  Improvement  and  Extension  Sinking  Fund — 

1913 . 

Park  Sinking  Fund — 1916 . 

Playgrounds  Sinking  Fund — 1916 . 

Park  Sinking  Fund — 1918 . 

Garbage  Disposal  Sinking  Fund — 1918 . 

Garbage  Disposal  Sinking  Fund — 1921 . 

Garbage  Disposal  Sinking  Fund — 1922 . 

Incinerating  Plant  Sinking  Fund — 1913 . 

Incinerating  Plant  Sinking  Fund — 1917 . 

Sewage  Disposal  Sinking  Fund — 1913 . 

Sewage  Disposal  Sinking  Fund — 1914 . 

Sewage  Disposal  Sinking  Fund — 1915 . 

Sewage  Disposal  Sinking  Fund — 1916 . 

Sewage  Disposal  Sinking  Fund — 1917 . 

Sewage  Disposal  Sinking  Fund — 1918 . 

Sewage  Disposal  Sinking  Fund — 1919-. . 

Sewage  Disposal  Sinking  Fund — 1921 . 

Exposition  Park  Sinking  Fund — 1913 . 

Rochester  and  State  Line  R.  R.  Sinking  Fund . 

Fire  House  Construction  Sinking-Fund — 1912 . 

Fire  House  Construction  Sinking  Fund — 1918 . 

Voting  Machine  Sinking  Fund — 1914 . 

Voting  Machine  Sinking  Fund — 1918 . 

School  Sinking  Fund — 1912 . 

School  Sinking  Fund — 1914 . 

School  Sinking  Fund — 1915 . 

School  Sinking  Fund — 1916 . 

School  Sinking  Fund — 1917 . 

School  Sinking  Fund — 1918 . 

School  Sinking  Fund — 1919 . 

School  Sinking  Fund — 1921 . 

City  Garage  Sinking  Fund — 1916 . 

Library  Sinking  Fund — 1916 . 

Municipal  Building  Const.  Sinking  Fund — 1919 _ 

Municipal  Building  Const.  Sinking  Fund — 1921  — 
Equipment — 1921 . 


$1  205  489.02 
231  832.79 
361  572.92 
146  821.45 
23  317.59 
79  000.74 
47  895.68 
33  927.55 
33  447.81 


$  5 

859 

.30 

91 

332 

.43 

18 

366 

.50 

918 

.18 

918 

.18 

1 

237 

.82 

3 

354 

.58 

64 

864 

.19 

3 

030 

.00 

13 

730 

.40 

2 

158 

.57 

127 

566 

.28 

98 

829 

.56 

51 

402 

.09 

25 

228 

.30 

39 

368 

.43 

18 

675 

56 

6 

223 

39 

3 

201 

25 

59 

063 

51 

105 

898 

24 

80 

083 

81 

2 

653 

16 

36 

412 

98 

1 

423 

16 

111 

265. 

45 

129 

331. 

30 

104 

441. 

20 

11 

044. 

49 

14 

862. 

69 

22 

731. 

79 

11 

916. 

37 

63 

231. 

82 

918. 

17 

918. 

18 

8 

646. 

23 

9 

727. 

20 

3 

668. 

31 

f 

$2  163  305.55 


354  503.07 


Total 


S3  517  808.62 


TABLE  No.  32 


BALANCES  OF  WATER  SINKING  FUNDS 
As  of  December  31,  1922 


Balance 

Fund  Dec.  31,  1922 

Hemlock  Lake . S  23 1  832 . 79 

Charter .  1  205  489.02 

1913 .  361  572.92 

1915  .  146  821.45 

1916  .  23  317.59 

1917  .  79  000.74 

1918  .  47  895.68 

1919  . • .  33  927.55 

1921 .  33  447.81 


Total . $2  163  305.55 


TABLE  No.  33 

BALANCES  OF  SPECIAL  SINKING  FUNDS 

(Excluding  Water  and  Public  Market) 

As  of  December  31,  1922 


Balance 

Fund  Dec.  31,  1922 

Parks  and  Playgrounds . S  112  773.11 

Garbage  Disposal .  71  248.77 

Incineration .  15  888.97 

Sewage  Disposal .  370  494.86 

Exposition  Park .  59  063.51 

Rochester  and  St.  Line  Railway .  105.898.24 

Fire  House  Construction . t .  82  736.97 

Voting  Machine .  37  836.14 

Schools .  468  825.11 

Garage — Serial . :  918.17 

Library — Serial .  918.18 

Municipal  Buildings — Serial .  18  373.43 

Street  Cleaning  Equipment — Serial .  3  668.31 


Total . $1  348  643.77 


TABLE  No.  34 

BALANCES  OF  SINKING  FUNDS 
As  of  December  31,  1922 


Balance 
Dec.  31,  1922 

Aggregate  Water  S.  F . $2  163  305.55 

Public  Market . 

General  S.  F . ' .  5  859.30 

Aggregate  all  other  Special  S.  F .  1  348  643.77 


Total . S3  517  808.62 


TABLES  No.  35 


ESTIMATED  DEFICITS  OF  SPECIAL  SINKING  FUNDS 

AT  MATURITY 


Water: 

Hemlock  Lake  Watershed 

Water — 1913 . 

Water — 1915 . 

Water — 1916 . 

Water — 1917 . 

Water — 1918 . 

Water — 1919 . 

Water — 1921 . 


80  000* 
1  043  000 
81  000 
62  000 
189  000 
187  000 
132  000 
391  000* 


General: 

Park  (Charter) . 

Park  Improvement  and  Extension. 

Incinerator  Plant . 

Sewage  Disposal— 1913 . 

Sewage  Disposal — 1914 . 

Sewage  Disposal — 1915 . 

Sewage  Disposal — 1916 . 

Sewage  Disposal — 1917 . 

Sewage  Disposal — 1918 . 

Sewage  Disposal — 1919 . 

Exposition  Park . 

Rochester  and  State  Line  Railway 

Fire  House  Construction . 

Voting  Machine — 1912-1924 . 

Garbage  Disposal — 1921 . 

Garbage  Disposal — 1922 . 

Schools — 1912 . 

Schools — 1913 . 

Schools — 1914 . 


87 

92 

65 

668 

94 

63 

87 

99 

73 

26 

315 

179 

5 

2 

701 

78 

143 

114 

186 


$1  223  000 


000 

000 

000 

000 

000 

000 

000 

000 

000 

000 

000 

000 

000* 

000 

000* 

000* 

000* 

000* 

000* 


623  000 


Total 


SI  846  000 


*Estimated  Surplus. 


TABLE  No.  36 

COLLECTIONS  FROM  BUSINESS  TAXES  (OTHER  THAN  ON 
LIQUOR  TRAFFIC)  AND  FROM  GENERAL  LICENSES  AND 
PERMITS  IN  THIRTEEN  CITIES,  1919 

(From  Census  Report) 


Busines 

Without 

License 

s  Taxes 

With 

License 

Dog 

Licenses 

General 

Licenses 

Permits 

Total 

Seattle . 

$  67  039 

$  5  076 

$  16  478 

$  8  389 

.$  96  982 

Jersey  City . 

$  29  650 

19  119 

3  204 

955 

19  164 

72  092 

Kansas  City . 

230  563 

16  078 

90  523 

31  441 

368  605 

Portland . 

64  758 

14  275 

961 

20  548 

100  542 

Indianapolis . 

29  866 

13  203 

43  032 

48  744 

136  845 

Denver . 

8  444 

112  201 

8  206 

44  430 

22  251 

195  532 

ROCHESTER . 

17  979 

14  944 

2  313 

35  236 

Providence . 

89 

50  793 

10  937 

134 

7  137 

69  090 

St.  Paul . 

200  782 

30  296 

3  138 

16 

3  135 

237  367 

Louisville . 

179  445 

6  494 

30  497 

216  436 

Columbus . 

18  024 

•  8  016 

8  420 

34  460 

Oakland . 

33  218 

67  062 

5  098 

90 

21  713 

127  181 

Toledo . 

16  005 

13  008 

29  013 

TABLE  No.  37 


LIST  OF  TERM  BONDS,  IN  ORDER  OF  MATURITY  DATES, 
WHICH  SHOULD  BE  CARRIED  BY  THE  GENERAL  FUND 

(Arranged  in  Order  of  Maturity  Dates) 


Fire  House.  .  .  . 
Voting  Machine 


1924 

$  100  000 
49  600 


149  600 


Park . 

Convention  Hall . 

Sewage  Disposal . 

Incinerator . 

Exposition  Park . 

Parks . 

Rochester  and  St.  Line 


1928 

1929 
1933 

1  000  000 
100  000 
470  000 
140  000 
480  000 


200  000 
100  000 


2  190  000 


Parks . 

Schools . 

Sewage  Disposal. . 
Schools . 

Sewage  Disposal. . 
Schools . 

Sewage  Disposal. . 

Sewage  Disposal. . 

Sewage  Disposal . . 

Sewage  Disposal. . 

Garbage  Disposal 

Garbage  Disposal 

Total . 


1936 

1942 

1944 

500  000 
500  000 

1945 

300  000 
400  000 

1946 

1947 

1948 

1949 

1951 

1952 


60  000 
350  000 

1  000  000 

700  000 
250  000 
350  000 
225  000 
80  000 
650  000 
90  000 


$6  394  600 


TABLE  No.  38 


ANALYSIS  OF  PROPOSED  GENERAL  DEBT  SERVICE 
On  Present  Outstanding  Term  Indebtedness 
.(December  31,  1922) 


Year 

Interest 

Present 
Sinking  Fund 
Provisions 

Necessary  Addi¬ 
tional  Install¬ 
ments  to 
Supplementary 
Sinking  Funds 

Total  Debt 
Service 

1923 

$  284  784 

$  112  650 

$  8  350 

$  405  784 

1924 

284  784 

112  650 

8  350 

405  784 

1925 

278  425 

99  650 

21  350 

399  425 

1926 

278  425 

99  650 

21  350 

399  425 

1927 

278  425 

99  650 

21  350 

399  425 

1928 

278  425 

99  650 

21  350 

399  425 

1929 

269  425 

99  650 

21  350 

390  425 

1930 

265  425 

99  650 

21  350 

386  425 

1931 

265  425 

99  650 

21  350 

386  425 

1932 

265  425 

99  650 

21  350 

386  425 

1933 

265  425 

99  650 

21  350 

386  425 

1934 

166  875 

72  350 

48  650 

287  875 

1935 

166  875 

72  350 

48  650 

287  875 

1936 

166  875 

72  350 

48  650 

287  875 

1937 

164  775 

68  750 

52  250 

285  775 

1938 

164  775 

68  750  • 

52  250 

285  775 

1939 

164  775 

68  750 

52  250 

285  775 

1940 

164  775 

68  750 

52  250 

285  775 

1941 

164  775 

68  750 

52  250 

285  775 

1942 

164  775 

68  750 

52  250 

285  775 

1943 

150  775 

59  750 

61  250 

271  775 

1944 

150  775 

59  750 

61  250 

271  775 

1945 

105  775 

45  750 

75  250 

226  775 

1946 

74  275 

33  750 

87  250 

195  275 

1947 

64  275 

31  250 

89  750 

185  275 

1948 

50  275 

27  750 

93  250 

171  275 

1949 

40  150 

25  500 

95  500 

161  150 

1950 

40  150 

24  700 

96  300 

161  150 

1951 

36  550 

24  700 

96  300 

147  550 

1952 

4  050 

3  000 

118  000 

125  050 

Total. . 

$5  210  718 

$2  087  600 

$1  542  400 

$8  850  718 

NOTE: — It  is  proposed  that  a  Supplementary  Sinking  Fund  be  established  to  take 
care  of  existing  deficiencies  in  the  various  general  sinking  funds.  In  order  to  provide  for 
retiring  the  general  term  bonds  when  due,  a  total  of  $121,000  will  have  to  be  set  up  each 
year. 


TABLE  No.  39 


ANALYSIS  OF  PROPOSED  WATER  DEBT  SERVICE 
On  Present  Outstanding  Term  Indebtedness 

(December  31,  1922) 


Year 

Interest 

Present 
Sinking  Fund 
Provisions 

Necessary  Addi¬ 
tional  Install¬ 
ments  to 
Supplementary 
Sinking  Fund 

Total  Debt 
Service 

1923 

$  430  000 

$  86  940 

$  119  060 

$  636  000 

1924 

430  000 

86  940 

119  060 

636  000 

1925 

424  050 

86  940 

119  060 

630  050 

1926 

424  050 

86  940 

119  060 

630  050 

1927 

424  050 

86  940 

119  060 

630  050 

1928 

424  050 

86  940 

119  060 

630  050 

1929 

424  050 

86  940 

119  060 

630  050 

1930 

424  050 

86  940 

119  060 

630  050 

1931 

424  050 

86  940 

119  060 

630  050 

1932 

424  050 

86  940 

119  060 

630  050 

1933 

424  050 

86  940 

119  060 

630  050 

1934 

246  450 

68  450 

137  550 

452  450 

1935 

246  450 

68  450 

137  550 

452  450 

1936 

233  850 

68  450 

137  550 

439  850 

1937 

233  850 

68  450 

137  550 

439  850 

1938 

233  850 

68  450 

137  550 

439  850 

1939 

233  850 

68  450 

137  550 

439  850 

1940 

233  850 

68  450 

137  550 

439  850 

1941 

233  850 

68  450 

137  550 

439  850 

1942 

233  850 

68  450 

137  550 

439  850 

1943 

176  350 

68  450 

137  550 

382  350 

1944 

164  350 

68  450 

137  550 

370  350 

1945 

131  100 

68  450 

137  550 

337  100 

1946 

99  600 

61  450 

144  550 

305  600 

1947 

91  600 

59  450 

146  550 

297  600 

1948 

64  200 

52  600 

153  400 

270  200 

1949 

38  325 

46  850 

159  150 

244  325 

1950 

18  750 

42  500 

163  500 

224  750 

1951 

18  750 

42  500 

163  500 

224  750 

Total. . . . 

$7  609  325 

$2  083  090 

$3  890  910 

$13  583  325 

NOTE: — It  is  proposed  that  a  Supplementary  Sinking  Fund  be  established  to  take  care 
of  existing  deficiencies  in  the  various  water  sinking  funds.  In  order  to  provide  for 
retiring  the  water  bonds  when  due,  a  total  of  $206,000.00  will  have  to  be  set  up  each  year. 


TABLE  No.  40 


ANALYSIS  OF  FUTURE  GENERAL  DEBT  SERVICE* 
Covering  Outstanding  Serial  Indebtedness 
(December  31,  1922)** 


Year 

Interest 

Serial 

Redemption 

Total  Debt 
Service 

1923 

$  528  277 . 88 

$  438  040 . 00 

$  966  317.88 

1924 

508  085.75 

437  290.00 

945  375.75 

1925 

487  923.63 

435  590.00 

923  513.63 

1926 

467  829.51 

435  590.00 

903  419.51 

1927 

447  735.39 

414  590.00 

862  325.39 

1928 

428  689.77 

414  190.00 

842  879.77 

1929 

409  662.15 

414  190.00 

823  852.15 

1930 

390  634.53 

414  190.00 

804  824.53 

1931 

371  606.91 

414  690.00 

786  296.91 

1932 

352  559  29 

414  690.00 

767  249.29 

1933 

333  511.67 

412  810.00 

746  321.67 

1934 

314  563.00 

411  560.00 

726  123.00 

1935 

295  672.50 

410  000.00 

705  672.50 

1936 

276  860.00 

410  000.00 

686  860.00 

1937 

258  047.50 

404  000.00 

662  047.50 

1938 

239  500.00 

404  000.00 

643  500.00 

1939 

220  877.50 

394  500.00 

615  377.50 

1940 

202  737.50 

394  500.00 

597  237.50 

1941 

184  597.50 

394  500.00 

579  097.50 

1942 

166  457.50 

379  500.00 

545  957.50 

1943 

149  092.50 

360  500.00 

509  592.50 

1944 

132  582.50 

360  500.00 

493  082.50 

1945 

116  072.50 

360  500.00 

476  572.50 

1946 

99  562.50 

360  500.00 

,  460  062.50 

1947 

83  277.50 

347  000.00 

430  277.50 

1948 

67  375.00 

337  000.00 

404  375.00 

1949 

51  872.50 

300  000.00 

351  872.50 

1950 

37  585.00 

277  000.00 

314  585.00 

1951 

24  782.50 

307  000.00 

331  782.50 

1952 

7  920.00 

176  000.00 

183  920.00 

Total . .  . 

$7  655  951.98 

$11  434  420.00 

$19  090  371.98 

*Includes  school  serial  indebtedness. 

**The  debt  service  analyzed  in  this  table  should  be  carried  by  the  general  fund 
(i.  e.,  it  includes  all  serial  bonds  except  those  which  should  be  carried  by  the  water  fund, 
the  public  market  fund,  or  the  assessment  funds.) 


TABLE  No.  41 


SUMMARY  BUDGET  FOR  CURRENT  FUNDS 


• 

General 

Fund 

School 

Fund 

Water 

Fund 

Market 

Fund 

Total 

Planned  Expenditures: 

For  Current  Expenses: 

000  000 

000  000 

000  000 

000  000 

000  000 

For  Fixed  Charges: 

Payment  of  Interest.  . 

000  000 

000  000 

000  000 

000  000 

000  000 

Other  Fixed  Charges.  . 

000  000 

000  000 

000  000 

000  000 

000  000 

For  Acquisition  of  Prop- 

erty . 

000  000 

000  000 

000  000 

000  000 

000  000 

For  Redemption  of  Debt: 

Redemption  Tempo- 

rary  Loans.  .  .  . 

000  000 

000  000 

000  000 

000  000 

000  000. 

Serial  Installments.  .  . 

000  000 

000  000 

000  000 

000  000 

000  000 

Sinking  Fund  Install- 

ments . 

000  000 

000  000 

000  000 

000  000 

000  000 

Estimated  Surplus . 

000  000 

000  000 

000  000 

000  000 

000  000 

Total . 

$000  000 

$000  000 

$000  000 

$000  000 

$000  000 

Means  of  Financing: 

Tax  Revenues: 

Limited . 

$000  000 

$000  000 

$000  000 

Unlimited . 

000  000 

000  000 

000  000 

Utility  Revenues . 

000  000 

000  000 

000  000 

Miscellaneous  Revenues . 

000  000 

000  000 

000  000 

Proceeds  Temporary 

Borrowing . 

000  000 

000  000 

Total . 

$000  000 

$000  000 

$000  000 

$000  000 

$000  000 

TABLE  No.  42 


BUDGET  APPROPRIATIONS 
A.  Appropriations  from  General  Fund 


TO  THE  MAYOR 

For  Current  Expenses .  0000.00 

TO  THE  BOARD  OF  ESTIMATE  AND  APPORTIONMENT 

For  Current  Expenses .  0000.00 

For  Contingent  Fund  (Subject  to  Reappropriation) .  0000.00 

TO  THE  BOARD  OF  CONTRACT  AND  SUPPLY 
For  Current  Expenses .  0000.00 

TO  THE  COMMON  COUNCIL  AND  CITY  CLERK 

For  Current  Expenses  of  Office  and  Council .  0000.00 

For  Election  Expenses .  0000.00 


TO  THE  COMPTROLLER 


For  Current  Expenses  of  Office .  0000.00 

For  Fixed  Charges  as  Specified  Below: 

Interest  on  General  Bonds  and  Notes .  As  Required 

(Estimated  at  0000 . 00) 

Judgments  and  Settlements .  As  Required 

(Estimated  at  0000 . 00) 

City’s  Share  Local  Assessments .  As  Required 

(Estimated  at  0000 . 00) 

Rebates  of  Taxes  and  Assessments .  As  Required 

(Estimated  at  0000 . 00) 

Reimbursement  of  Water  Fund: 

Free  Water  for  Charitable  Institutions .  As  Required 

(Estimated  at  0000 . 00) 

Reimbursement  of  Water  Fund: 

Free  Water  for  City .  0000.00 


Reimbursement  of  Water  Fund  for 

Cost  of  Fire  Protection . 

Contribution  to  Police  Pension  Fund . 

Contribution  to  Fire  Pension  Fund . 

Contribution  to  Employees  Pension  Fund 

Pensions  to  Veterans . 

Grant  to  Infants’  Summer  Hospital . 

Grant  to  Rochester  Dental  Dispensary.  .  . 


Grant  to  S.  P.  C.  A . . 

Grant  to  S.  P.  C.  C . . 

For  Acquisition  of  Property . 

to  be  spent  for  Following  Objects: 

(specify  items) 

For  Redemption  of  Debt  as  Specified  Below: 

Redemption  of  General  Current  Expense  Notes . 

Serial  Installments  on  Funded  Debt — General . 

Sinking  Fund  Installments  on  Funded  Debt — General 


0000.00 
0000.00 
0000 . 00 
0000 . 00 
0000.00 
0000.00 
0000.00 
0000.00 
0000.00 
0000.00 


0000.00 

0000.00 

0000.00 


TO  THE  LAW  DEPARTMENT 


For  Current  Expenses .  0000.00 

For  Purchase  of  Land  on  Tax  Foreclosure .  0000.00 


Item 

Item 

Item 

Item 


Item 

Item 


Item 

Item 

Item 

Item 

Item 

Item 


Item 

Item 

Item 

Item 

Item 

Item 

Item 

Item 

Item 

Item 

Item 


Item 

Item 

Item 


Item 

Item 


TABLE  No.  42 — Continued 


TO  THE  ART  COMMISSION 

For  Current  Expenses .  0000.00  Item 

TO  THE  TREASURER 

For  Current  Expenses .  0000.00  Item 

TO  THE  DEPARTMENT  OF  ASSESSMENT  AND  TAXATION 
For  Current  Expenses .  0000.00  Item 

TO  THE  CIVIL  SERVICE  COMMISSION 
For  Current  Expenses .  0000.00  Item 

TO  THE  CITY  COURT— CRIMINAL  BRANCH 
For  Current  Expenses .  0000.00  Item 

TO  THE  CITY  COURT— CIVIL  BRANCH 
For  Current  Expenses .  0000.00  Item 


TO  THE  COMMISSIONER  OF  PUBLIC  SAFETY— CENTRAL  OFFICE 
For  Current  Expenses .  0000.00  Item 


TO  THE  BUREAU  OF  FIRE  AND  POLICE  TELEGRAPH 

For  Current  Expenses .  0000.00  Item 

For  Acquisition  of  Property .  0000.00  Item 

to  be  spent  for  Following  Objects: 

(specify  items) 

TO  THE  BUREAU  OF  HEALTH 

For  Current  Expenses 

to  be  spent  According  to  the  following  Schedule  of  F  unctions : 


General  Health  Service .  0000.00  Item 

Municipal  Hospital .  0000.00  Item 

For  Acquisition  of  Property .  0000.00  Item 

to  be  spent  for  Following  Objects: 

(specify  items) 

TO  THE  BUREAU  OF  FIRE 

For  Current  Expenses .  0000.00  Item 

For  Fixed  Charges  as  specified  below: 

Contribution  to  Hose  Co.  No.  22 .  0000.00  Item 

Contribution  to  Rochester  Protectives .  0000.00  Item 

For  Acquisition  of  Property .  0000.00  Item 

to  be  spent  for  following  Objects: 

(specify  items) 

TO  THE  BUREAU  OF  PLAYGROUNDS 
For  Current  Expenses .  0000.00  Item 


TO  THE  DEPARTMENT  OF  CHARITIES 
For  Current  Expenses . . .  0000.00  Item 

TO  G.  A.  R.  RELIEF  COMMISSION 

For  Current  Expenses  and  Relief .  0000.00  Item 

For  Memorial  Day  Celebration  Expenses .  0000.00  Item 

TO  THE  DEPARTMENT  OF  PUBLIC  WORKS— CENTRAL  OFFICE 

For  Current  Expenses .  0000.00 


Item 


TABLE  No.  42 — Continued 


TO  THE  BUREAU  OF  STREETS  AND  SEWERS 
For  Current  Expenses 

to  be  Spent  According  to  following  Schedule  of  Functions: 

Highway  and  Maintenance  and  Operation .  0000.00  Item 

Operation  and  Maintenance  of  Sewerage  System. . .  .  0000.00  Item 

Street  Lighting  Contract .  0000.00  Item 

For  Fixed  Charges  as  Specified  Below: 

Taxes .  0000.00  Item 

For  Acquisition  of  Property .  0000.00  Item 

to  be  spent  for  Following  Objects: 

(specify  items) 

TO  THE  BUREAU  OF  SANITATION 

For  Current  Expenses 

to  be  spent  according  to  Following  Schedule  of  Functions: 

Supervision .  0000.00  Item 

Street  Cleaning .  0000.00  Item 

Refuse  Collection .  0000.00  Item 

Refuse  Disposal .  0000.00  Item 

For  Fixed  Charges  as  Specified  Below: 

Taxes  on  Disposal  Plant .  0000.00  Item 

For  Acquisition  of  Property .  0000.00  Item 

to  be  spent  for  Following  Objects: 

(specify  items) 

TO  THE  BUREAU  OF  ACCOUNTS  AND  RECORDS 
For  Current  Expenses .  0000.00  Item 

TO  THE  CITY  GARAGE 

For  Current  Expenses .  *  0000.00  Item 

TO  THE  BUREAU  OF  WEIGHTS  AND  MEASURES 
For  Current  Expenses .  0000.00  Item 

TO  THE  CITY  ENGINEER’S  OFFICE 
For  Current  Expenses 

to  be  spent  according  to  Following  Schedule  of  Functions: 

Testing  Laboratory .  0000.00  Item 

General  Engineering  Service .  0000.00  Item 

For  Acquisition  of  Property . ».  .  .  0000.00  Item 

to  be  spent  for  Following  Objects: 

(specify  items) 

TO  THE  BUREAU  OF  MUNICIPAL  BUILDINGS 
For  Current  Expenses .  0000.00  Item 

TO  THE  BUREAU  OF  CITY  PLANNING 
For  Current  Expenses .  0000.00  Item 


TABLE  No.  42 — Continued 


B.  Appropriations  from  the  School  Fund 

TO  THE  DEPARTMENT  OF  PUBLIC  INSTRUCTION 

For  Current  Expenses .  0000.00 

For  Fixed  Charges  as  Specified  Below: 

Contribution  to  Teachers’  Retirement  Funds .  As  Required 

(Estimated  at  0000 . 00) 

Taxes .  0000.00 

For  Acquisition  of  Property .  0000.00 

to  be  spent  for  Following  Objects: 

(specify  items) 

TO  THE  COMPTROLLER 


For  Fixed  Charges  as  Specified  Below: 

Interest  on  School  Bonds  and  Notes .  As  Required 

(Estimated  at  0000 . 00) 

Reimbursement  of  Water  Fund 

Free  Water  for  Schools .  0000 . 00 

For  Redemption  of  Debt  as  Specified  Below: 

Redemption  of  School  Current  Expense  Notes .  0000.00 

Serial  Installments  on  Funded  School  Debt .  0000.00 

Sinking  Fund  Installments  on  Funded  School  Debt.  0000.00 


C.  Appropriations  from  the  Water  Fund 

TO  THE  BUREAU  OF  WATER 


Far  Current  Expenses .  0000.00 

For  Fixed  Charges  as  Specified  Below: 

Taxes . .  0000.00 

For  Acquisition  of  Property .  0000.00 


to  be  spent  according  to  Following  Objects: 

(specify  items) 

TO  THE  COMPTROLLER 

For  Fixed  Charges  as  Specified  Below: 

Interest  on  Water  Bonds  and  Notes .  As  Required 

(Estimated  at  0000.00) 

For  Redemption  of  Debt  as  Specified  Below: 

Sinking  Fund  Installments  on  Funded  Water  Debt.  .  .  0000.00 

D.  Appropriations  from  Public  Market  Fund 

TO  THE  BUREAU  OF  PUBLIC  MARKET 


For  Current  Expenses .  0000.00 

TO  THE  COMPTROLLER 

For  Fixed  Charges  as  Specified  Below: 

Interest  on  Market  Bonds .  As  Required 


(Estimated  at  0000 . 00) 


Item 

Item 

Item 

Item 

Item 

Item 

Item 

Item 

Item 


Item 

Item 

Item 

Item 

Item 


Item 

Item 


/ 


.  / 


